Ten years after the Supreme Court extended marriage rights to same-sex couples nationwide, the justices this fall will consider for the first time whether to take up a case that explicitly asks them to overturn that decision.
Kim Davis, the former Kentucky county clerk who was jailed for six days in 2015 after refusing to issue marriage licenses to a gay couple on religious grounds, is appealing a $100,000 jury verdict for emotional damages plus $260,000 for attorneys fees.
In a petition for writ of certiorari filed last month, Davis argues First Amendment protection for free exercise of religion immunizes her from personal liability for the denial of marriage licenses.
Could we just get government out of the marriage game? It seems to be the source of all the problems. They simply shouldn’t care.
Even if we don’t this is such a simple concept: Marriage is a contract. The requirements for a contract is consenting adults. How can they make gender determine who can sign a contract? That would be unreasonable.
I think you’re second point is more important. The religious part of marriage is actually meaningless in the eyes of the law even today, you still need to apply for a marriage certificate with the government.
I think we just need to extend that to just be a cohabitation/shared asset contract for any two+ people. It makes a lot of legal sense to have a defined “family unit” for medical/legal/financial reasons, but it shouldn’t overlap with religious concepts.
Religion is a monstrous evil.
But Jesus said gays bad!
He didn’t say anything about love!
Oh, wait…
did he?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2012/apr/20/was-jesus-gay-probably
i thought jesus was trans though, as parthenogenesis necessitates a female offspring
si would be eve, as she’s a clone of Adam.
okay see this is my first problem. that means he would taste great. I’ve tasted their jesus. jesus is dry and crumbly. i’ve also tasted ribs. are ribs dry and crumbly?
I really don’t get the Jesus-as-nasty-dry-cracker shit. If they’d made him into a Little Debbie’s zebra cake, I’d still be a churchgoer today.
I’d disagree here. Jesus was a Rabbi. And Rabbi are usually required to be married.
But the early church was extremely anti-woman.
Mary Magdalene is always portrayed as a whore who just sort of hung around.
But she seems to be more important than that. Especially in the dead sea scrolls.
Paul, or Saul, on the other hand, seems to have been the source of the anti-woman aspects of the early church.
You are conflating the dead sea scrolls with the Nag Hammadi library. The Dead Sea Scrolls do not contain any Christian texts, only Jewish texts from around the time of Jesus. The Nag Hammadi library contains a number of texts typically described as “gnostic” and some of these include teachings attributed to Mary Magdalene.
I do get the two confused, yes. Thank you.
As someone raised in the Baptist faith, but got the hell out, Baptists fucking LOVE Saul/Paul and he’s basically 60%+ of their entire schtick. Largely because he was such a staunch stickler of a person. I mean God supposedly made him blind so he’d stop being an asshole.
But it’s stress, pain and suffering for those they don’t like!!