[PLUG-TALK] What is Marriage? - biblicat justifications

[Someone]

On Fri, 2009-01-02 at 21:42 -0800, Russell Senior wrote:
> >>>>> "Someone" == Someone  <plug_1 at robinson-west.com> writes:
> 
> Someone> I have clearly demonstrated by the links I have posted that
> Someone> "homosexual marriage" threatens freedom of religion.  
> 
> This point should be made, so I'll try to do it succinctly:
> 
> You can have whatever kind of religion you want.  What you *cannot* do
> is impose that religion on other people.  If you want to have a
> theocracy, move to afghanistan and join the taliban or something.
> Then you can stone people to death if you don't agree with them, and
> they you (apologies to the taliban for maligning them unfairly).
> 
> The only marriage the state cares about is civil marriage.  Religious
> marriage is the domain of whatever arbitrary crackpot
> mythology/orthodoxy you want to dream up.  Since all that the state
> controls is civil marriage and the *legal* things that flow from that
> institution, it is not bound by your or anyone elses arbitrary
> crackpot mythology/orthodoxy.
> 
> p.s.: i take back my crack about obama's health plan getting you your
> medication.  I looked it up.  There is no pill for your problem.

The opposition to "homosexual marriage," which is impossible, is not
purely religious.  Look at all of my most recent posts.  Specifically,
look at by Jimmy Akin.  As far as there being no pill for me, that's
because I'm not diseased and don't need a pill.

The state most certainly cares about more than just Civil marriage.
It cares about real marriage as that is preferable to so called
marriages that don't last and don't support children.  It is in
the state's best interest to support heterosexual couples more
than homosexual ones and it is not discriminatory to do so.