|why I'm not in charge|
why I'm not in charge
Nov. 9th, 2005 @ 08:01 am
(yah, I posted this as a reply to someone else's journal before deciding to post it in my own. sue me :))
in silverlande, the Church would have marriage, and the State would have property-sharing/rights-sharing/mutual-power-of-attorney-sharing, and the two would not intermix except by "coincidence." Thus 2 (or more!) people of any gender (or race, religion, etc) could get all the "rights of marriage" regardless of whether they found a church that shares their opinions. People in churches (or synagogues, or sacred groves, or whatever) could get married and/or divorced all day without it affecting anything legal until they signed a (separate) contract.
but I'm a hard-liner for separation of Church and State.
some pair of guys in texas with some time to spend in court need to get married and challenge the law on religious freedom grounds.
I've been saying this sort of thing for years. Can i live in silverlande?
amen! <ahem> silverlande sounds quite sane and reasonable.
|Date:||November 9th, 2005 08:23 pm (UTC)|| |
And so, the reason you're not in charge is b/c the world is not yet ready for sane and reasonable? Will it ever be? (After all, Texans voted this in as a SECOND law with the same meaning.)
|Top of Page
||Powered by LiveJournal.com|