Because .Bridget started the topic, and
she's from .New .Hampshire, I am assuming
we're discussing gay marriage legislation
in the .U.S.A.
The .United .States government is a
democracy, and we're the "land of the
free" because this is where people would
come to escape religious persecution. The
entire existence of this nation is based
on the concept of the seperation of
.Church and .State, which is why .I find
this whole arguement so silly. Civil
unions are legal in some states, but not
others, which makes them void in any state
that does not recognize a civil union as a
legally binding contract between a man and
a man or a woman and a woman that entitles
them to most of the same rights of
heterosexual married couples. Homosexual
couples are married in some states, but
not in others, making things such as life
insurance or next of kin quite difficult
to sort out if one partner were to die. A
grey area, or legal limbo, if you will.
If our lawmakers would realize that
because this is .America and we're
supposed to be seperating church and
state, there would be no need for an
arguement about this issue, because in the
eyes of the law, religious beliefs of
legislators should have no bearing on
their vote.