I know it's hardly newsworthy when an evangelical is a total tool . . . But this had to be shared.
This is a very clear and obvious violation of the doctrine of separation of church and state.
I'd be fine with that (and not just because I'm opposed to marriage). I'd like to see a secular civil union apply to everyone equally regardless of genders, and then religious weddings could officially be "marriages" (and then just take the marriage certificate to the courthouse to have it registered as a civil union as well, with a retroactive date). This would take the thunder out of a lot of the objections to same-sex marriage (e.g., the argument that it would force ordained ministers to perform same-sex marriages, thus violating their consciences).
@NerdyOkieDude I get what you're saying, but this was an idea I had years ago. My idea was to take away their arguments for objecting to same-sex unions, basically making all legal marriage secular but allowing the churches to have their ceremonies. I actually think it's funny that there's a deacon proposing what I considered to be a middle finger to religious bigots a decade ago.
You take opposite position as well and say that marriages aren’t legally binding unless they are performed by a JP. Wedding ceremonies and the legal part of marriage don’t have to be joined at the hip.