Social conservatives say gay marriage threatens religious freedom [View All]

[Hepburn]

Social conservatives say gay marriage threatens religious freedom

BOSTON --Gov. Mitt Romney displayed the enthusiasm of a preacher Sunday at a Baptist church as he addressed an anti-gay marriage rally of conservative religious leaders who argue that their rights to religious expression are being threatened.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/10/15/social_conservatives_say_gay_marriage_threatens_religious_freedom/

I am NOT getting this. Apparently there are very few, in no, Constitutional scholars in this group. Frankly, as I see it, these groups consist solely of complete idiots who have NEVER had a Con Law class in their sorry lives. And, at this point in time, they BADLY need to understand some basics of Con Law.

The Bill of Rights consists of TWO types of freedoms: Freedoms FROM and Freedoms TO. In pertinent part, the First Amendment reads as follows:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

This is a FREEDOM FROM right ~~ and in this case, a FREEDOM FROM religion. What these assholes wish to do is impose their religious beliefs on other groups. Freedom FROM religion does NOT consist of imposing religous beliefs on others and that is EXACTLY what the anti-gay marriage laws are specifically designed to do. They can talk about their religious beliefs all the want ~~ that is an EXPRESSION. Imposing their beliefs on others, IMO, is totally un-Constitutional.

Marriage is a civil contract ~~ if it were ONLY a religious matter, then ONLY churches and licensed clergy could be licensed to perform the legal rituals which result in a marriage. If these asshats carry their "logic" to its ultimate conclusion, then any couple who wished to get married ~~ be they gay or straight ~~ would be required to have the ceremony done in a church by a licensed clergyman. And, again, carrying this "logic" even further, only churches would then be licensed to dissolve marriages~~ divorce courts would disappear and religious grounds would then be substituted for any "no fault" grounds.

Where do these idiots come up with these stupid ideas?!?!?!?! Can't they understand that what they want is NOT something which is Constitutionally permissible. Isn't there at least ONE person amongst them who has a clue about the US Constitution?