The Shapiro quote is 100% accurate. Marriage is a religious institution, and the government has no business forcing churches to marry people, forcing people to participate in wedding ceremonies, etc.
What government DOES have a business in is how partner status impacts various legal aspects, like hospital visitations, tax burdens, etc. But, instead of doing the logical thing (ripping out the laws that have your marital or family status impact your taxes, putting systems in place so anyone can specify anyone else as allowed to visit in hospital, etc.) they decided to go the "no, gay people can marry too!"
Because I'm increasingly convinced it was never about "rights". It was more about being able to sue Christian bakers into oblivion for not participating in their degeneracy than it was about letting gay people get married. Just like it's more about forcing other people to perform abortions (especially if they don't want to) than it is about access to abortions.
A Republican Oklahoma legislator tried to invoke the nuclear option and put forward a bill that would remove the state from being involved in marriage entirely. There would be no marriage licenses at all, only civil unions. Everyone laughed him out of government, including conservatives who said he was anti-family and anti-religion and giving the gays what they want by destroying the institution.
Yep, that's why Obergefell didn't say "civil unions are perfectly fine, because they confer all the legal status that marriage does." Because the goal was to destroy the family, not to apply the 14th amendment to technicalities in one category.
The Shapiro quote is 100% accurate. Marriage is a religious institution, and the government has no business forcing churches to marry people, forcing people to participate in wedding ceremonies, etc.
What government DOES have a business in is how partner status impacts various legal aspects, like hospital visitations, tax burdens, etc. But, instead of doing the logical thing (ripping out the laws that have your marital or family status impact your taxes, putting systems in place so anyone can specify anyone else as allowed to visit in hospital, etc.) they decided to go the "no, gay people can marry too!"
Because I'm increasingly convinced it was never about "rights". It was more about being able to sue Christian bakers into oblivion for not participating in their degeneracy than it was about letting gay people get married. Just like it's more about forcing other people to perform abortions (especially if they don't want to) than it is about access to abortions.
A Republican Oklahoma legislator tried to invoke the nuclear option and put forward a bill that would remove the state from being involved in marriage entirely. There would be no marriage licenses at all, only civil unions. Everyone laughed him out of government, including conservatives who said he was anti-family and anti-religion and giving the gays what they want by destroying the institution.
Wasnt that the guy who had a separate marriage bill, that didnt include gays? Or another one?
They claimed he was a pedo because he didnt specify what age could get married/
Yep, that's why Obergefell didn't say "civil unions are perfectly fine, because they confer all the legal status that marriage does." Because the goal was to destroy the family, not to apply the 14th amendment to technicalities in one category.