tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1379348459799634768.post5011260842612910434..comments2024-03-15T20:40:42.249-07:00Comments on The State of the Union: Gay Marriage: Not Progressive, Fair, or AccessibleArthur Christopher Schaperhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15447642567461072221noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1379348459799634768.post-29518625962330960222013-07-02T23:15:49.960-07:002013-07-02T23:15:49.960-07:00Even if the government is willing to become a Chri...Even if the government is willing to become a Christian theocracy and ultimately subject itself to doctrinal interpretations of some men. Why should they choose anti-gay marriage ones over pro-gay marriage ones. After all some Reformed folks would be happy to take a sledgehammer to the statue of the Blessed Mother. Should the gov't let them violate the property rights of Papists just because they stomp their feet?<br />Not to mention that many Reformers had maniacal tendencies when given political power, basically bordering on Führerprinzip. According to the rule of law, these people should have been in jail.gareginhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14508392154453584343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1379348459799634768.post-70881083681180235372013-07-02T23:01:21.990-07:002013-07-02T23:01:21.990-07:00I am against gay marriage too! But not by swinging...I am against gay marriage too! But not by swinging a sword over the constitution and the legal process. DOMA was too draconian. I think that the Fed gov't should honor state contracts including gay marriage ones. Otherwise you are entering murky waters of nasty legal disputes and accusations of unequal protection under the law. But all this is a half-measure (as Ludwig Von Mises would put it)<br />In the long view, marriage should be completely de-statized. If some liberal Protestant kook wants to marry a dog to a drag-queen then others shouldn't be able to come in and beat them with sticks.<br />For Christians to support gov't licensed straight marriage as some holy sacrament is utterly hypocritical. For one thing the state doesn't have the right to tell others how to marry! For the state to follow the marital teachings of say, John Chrysostom over pro-gay Protestants would be an a betrayal of the constitution as it would be implicitly elevating the religious teachings of some group vs. another (basically violating the first amendment)gareginhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14508392154453584343noreply@blogger.com