ANOTHER School Shooting - 5 Dead

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Mad4stevie

. . . As you have indicated, there are constitutional rights not specifically stated in the Constitution . . . .

That the Court creates these rights out of thin air is somewhat scary to me. In other words and thankfully, most of the cases seem to err on the side if creating some right that allows people to live in a freer manner. But, get enough Scalia's on the Court and that same "good thing" could turn against the currect line of thought.

Of course, the root of all this bruhaha is, once again, the far religious right, which cannot abide anyone not adhereing to their public, but likely not private, canonical life. Marriage is a good example. Why is it so important for the U.S. Govt. to sanction (with benefits and rights) any kind of marriage to the misfortune of those forms of marriages outside the traditional religious form? What would it hurt to delete marriage from any and all laws and instead allow people to determine what, where, and how, there property rights are determined when they die or while they are alive? The answer to me is so apparent that no harm will come -- but even mildly religious people seem to think God will be angered if the state does not sanction, for the most part, a rather incorrect form of Christianity. Sanctioning one religion over another or forcing someone to believe in a religion or denying someone benefits because they have a different or no religion flies in the face of most of the Bill of Rights, to wit:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

In the end, the religious busy bodies so concerned with the manner in which other people conduct their private, "sinful" lives should follow Jesus Himself's teaching about concentrating on your own sins and leaving God to do the judging. That concept is way too hard for the far religious right, despite Christ Himself setting it forth