Ake:

You are 180 degrees out on your last post, amigo. I was making exactly the same point you just made!!! The issue is not moral (or religious) judgement, simply civil rights.

In fact by birnging the church's marriage ceremony into it, you are sliding back into the religious aspect. But you raise an interesting point.

There are plenty of secular (non-religious) marriage ceremonies, lean, simple and direct routines used by JoPs or courthouse staff whop have no collar or religious title. They are civil ceremonies.

The marriage ceremony used by civil officers is religion-neutral, by necessity.

Why should extending it to include same-sex couples offend any member of one or another denomination or sect? Where is the harm, offense, or infringement? I hear you say (up thread) that this would infringe on others' rights, but you have not answered my repeated questions as to whom and how such hurt would occur.

But denying those civil standings to individuals because of their sexual orientation DOES infringe on equal rights under the law.


A