btw,
most religions as practiced for 250 years in the USA, don't really care what the Federal Government does. It has no baring upon their free exercise thereof.
The gubmint can call a civil partnership a "marriage" or label it whatever the hell word within vocabulary that they want,
yet it doesn't make the arrangement "a holy matrimony" in the eyes of any religion.
This is where actual Separation of Church & State comes to play.
Notice how many religions have yet to perform even one of these ceremonies.
Nor can the state compel them to do so.
Karen Davis is being fined in amounts that are personally and individually ridiculous.
She ought at best have been furloughed for failure to do the "new progressive duties" of her job.
A job she did for years w/o any complaints from the public. The rules changed on her.
The consequence is not equal to the non-compliance to the new ordinance and her civil disobedience that she's accused of acting upon.
Seriously. Now that same gender marriage is legal. & at the same time heterosexual marriage is still legal:
Can a person be interested in being married to one of each?
Can one truly be Bisexual, w/o being discriminated against in being forced by the parameters of the State, to choose between both of people they love,
in order to experience the tax benefits of a marriage.
Why not let them be married to one of each person they love?
btw, I'm not advocating for such, just curious as to the logic of disingenuous
"gay marriage for the G and not the B" advocates.
