| EdHieron said: No, Santorum wants an Amendment to the Constitution that would forbid gay marriage in America. I think you're splitting hairs on the legal / illegal semantics. Could gays be married if Santorum had his way? No. Would they receive the ammenities of being married? No. Would the marriages that there are now be broken up? Yes. So, whether they're illegal or whatever, they wouldn't exist. Therefore, since there's nothing particular sacred about marriage anyway, since that's just a myth, gays would still be being denied a right that everybody else has in the supposed freest nation on earth. There's certainly not any moutains of evidence for anything any of the religionists claim: Everything from the age of the earth, to the earth's position in the universe, to the who wrote the Bible and when has been thoroughly disproven by mainstream academia. How do you think all of the poor people from rural and inner city areas would receive proper educations without the Department of Education? |
It's hardly splitting hairs. There is a massive difference between illegal behavior (criminal behavior that is punishable by law) and extralegal behavior (behavior that simply isn't recognized by law). Even a constitutional amendment wouldn't prevent states from recognizing gay marriages or civil unions if they chose to do so. After all, what would be the penalty for doing so?
I'd argue that rural and inner city students aren't receiving proper educations now. How do you suppose people managed to educate their kids prior to 1979 when the Department of Education was first established? Has giving the federal government a functional monopoly over education improved things for anyone other than bureaucrats and teachers' unions?
