originally posted in:Secular Sevens
So to be clear, this might lead to an amendment to the US constitution legalizing same-sex marriage? Because that's all I really care about.
English
-
The first amendment should already cover same-sex marriage. :/
-
Well, you have to keep in mind that same-sex marriage wasn't really an issue in the late 18th century, and there's no way the founding fathers could have known how big a deal it was. That said, I see no reason why it should've been covered in the first amendment rather than any other amendment. If one amendment should prohibit the legalization of same-sex marriage, I think it would be the 14th. Honestly, I have no clue why that prohibits the legalization of interracial marriage, but not of same-sex marriage.
-
That one too. But I meant that the 1st amendment implies that we're not allowed to govern based off of a religion.
-
All the first amendment says with regards to religion is that ''congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.'' I don't see how that has anything to do with same-sex marriage.
-
We cannot establish laws preventing homosexuals from being married for religious reasons. There are no reasons other than religious ones.
-
I'm actually skeptical of whether or not these beliefs are caused by religion (rather, I'd be more inclined to believe that people merely cite religion as a justification for their pre-conceived morals). Nevertheless, nothing inherent in the action is opposing same-sex marriage is necessarily grounded in religion. By this, I mean one could theoretically oppose same-sex marriage while not believing in any religion. Therefore, you can't say that making same-sex marriage illegal is explicitly prohibited by the 1st amendment. When you say ''there are no reasons other than religious ones'', you're making a claim of knowledge of people's intentions, which is an unprovable claim.