Re: California's top court overturns gay marriage ban

"juanjo" <jonpetry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:194dd9a4-b119-45a8-901a-cad52c34e9ad@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On May 15, 12:32 pm, "Dennis Kemmerer" <d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "S.LaRocca" <geec...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>> news:Xns9A9F9ADBE5BBEgeechelyahoocom@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> > Oh, I can't wait until the God Squad pipes up on this one... I'm just

>> > big
>> > enough of a person to admit how childish I am when the fundies get 
>> > their
>> > nose out of joint, and do the usual **** like calling it an 
>> > abomination,
>> > scripture reciting, and a call to arms for all the god squad.
>>
>> > Yes, I admit it... I'm not grown up yet, and I love seeing them blow 
>> > up.
>> > AHHH HAAAA HAAAA !
>>
>> You should see the discussion boards on CNN and Yahoo! News.  The
fundies
>> are blowing a collective gasket and cutting and pasting half the bible.
>> What say we all chip in for a few dozen relief planes full of Get The 
>> ****
>> Over It pills and certificates for remedial Civics courses.
>
> The simple problem for fundamentalists **** is that they think that
> civil marriage is the same as the religious institution of the same
> name.  The simple remedy for that is to follow the European model and
> not allow religious clergy any part in civil marriage.  In Europe,
> Mexico and many other countries, civil marriage takes place when one
> goes down to the registrar and marry.  This is legal marriage and the
> only one legally recognized for civil purposes.  If one wishes to have
> some sort of religious ceremony they can do so but it has no legal
> effect whatsoever.

That's exactly how it works in the U.S. as well.  The religious ceremony
has 
no legal weight; it's the signature on the civil marriage license that
makes 
it legal.  What confuses people is that just like a ****p's captain or a 
Justice of the Peace, clergy are also agents of the state, hence the
phrase 
'by the power vested in me by the state of . . .'