Reply
Tue 21 Mar, 2006 10:57 pm
On Wednesday, March 1, 2006, in Annapolis, Maryland, at a hearing on the proposed constitutional amendment to prohibit gay marriage, Jamie Raskin, Professor of law at American University, testified. At the end of his testimony, Republican Senator Nancy Jacobs said, "Mr. Raskin, my Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman. What do you have to say about that?"
Raskin replied, "Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution. You did not place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible."
The room erupted into applause
@oaktonarcher,
Makes sense to me. :dunno:
@oaktonarcher,
So why did she have to swear on a bible and not the constitution? Why is she bound to that when others are not. Using her conviction against her?
As with the bible and most any law in any US city or local. A marriage is between a man and a women. In that saying not two men or two women are being denied a marriage. They are free to marry any one of the "opposite" sex. Not hard to understand but yet we have this miscomunication. It is not just the law of the bible, it is the law of mankind as well as nature. To be opposing in sex for procreation is natural, to be like sexed for precreation is unatural. I didn't make the rules but we all live by them. Unless you want to be special or favored with unfair legislation to accomodate you, but then you are not equal are you, your favored? So IMO is makes no sense.
In other words the Constitution falls back on it local state government to define marriage. And they all define it between a man and a women. Find one that doesn't and you have room to argue. For that specific local only.
@oaktonarcher,
^ You are only equal if you have the same rights as every body else. If men and women are to be considered equal, then they must have equal rights. If a man can marry a woman. why can't a woman marry a woman or vice versa. Granted I recognize God will not bless this union, the law should not be based on our religious beliefs.
@oaktonarcher,
According to most state laws i have seen. The Law says any person has the right to marry the opposite sex as in nature, bible and common law. That is the right. If any may marry the opposite sex then how are they denied that right. They are not being denied.
What they want is to redefine what the law says so they are favored for there behavior. With is abnormal to most definitions of the word. They want to be given a special previlege because they are abnormal. Most history and any society also think this to be true. Normal, abnormal= hetero, homosexual. Nature, society as a whole and the bible shun the thought. No explain why the mahority that don't approve be forced to recognise this type of fruitless relationship to be equal? The equality you seek is there, both sexes have the same right. That right is to marry the opposite sex! It's not just religious, it's nature and it's humanity that keeps it so. You do not need any senario to figure out which one is they way it is all intended. One will get you past this life, the later will end at your end for precreation is not in your futrure.