View Single Post
Old 08-05-2010, 07:46 AM   #10
Manul
Junior Member

How Do You Identify?:
Humanlike
 
Manul's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: In the South
Posts: 53
Thanks: 87
Thanked 118 Times in 41 Posts
Rep Power: 349
Manul Has the BEST ReputationManul Has the BEST ReputationManul Has the BEST ReputationManul Has the BEST ReputationManul Has the BEST ReputationManul Has the BEST ReputationManul Has the BEST ReputationManul Has the BEST ReputationManul Has the BEST ReputationManul Has the BEST ReputationManul Has the BEST Reputation
Default

I have to love this headline from USAToday.

Prop 8 judge to religious believers: It's not about you

Included in the article:

Quote:
You could summarize it pretty quickly, Walker seems to be saying, "'Believers, it's not about you."

The ruling says:

Marriage in the United States has always been a civil matter. Civil authorities may permit religious leaders to solemnize marriages but not to determine who may enter or leave a civil marriage. Religious leaders may determine independently whether to recognize a civil marriage or divorce but that recognition or lack thereof has no effect on the relationship under state law.

Walker also writes,

Proposition 8 does not affect the First Amendment rights of those opposed to marriage for same-sex couples. Prior to Proposition 8, no religious group was required to recognize marriage for same-sex couples.

He cites the California constitution that...

[A]ffording same-sex couples the opportunity to obtain the designation of marriage will not impinge upon the religious freedom of any religious organization, official, or any other person; no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.

Walker examines about how several major religious groups -- Catholics, Mormons, conservative evangelicals such as the South Baptist Convention, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod -- condemn either homosexual identity or behavior or both, citing documents from the Vatican to denominational resolutions.

But he spells out in all capital letters in the decision:

A PRIVATE MORAL VIEW THAT SAME-SEX COUPLES ARE INFERIOR TO OPPOSITE-SEX COUPLES IS NOT A PROPER BASIS FOR LEGISLATION...

California's obligation is to treat its citizens equally, not to "mandate [its] own moral code."
I'm sure those with strong fundamentalist religious feelings won't see the logic of the Judge, but it's a matter of equality under the Constitution, not about religion.
__________________
No matter who you are...
Manul is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Manul For This Useful Post: