...based on your interpretation of the constitution. Have you read the opinion?
So you would rather have them offer a religious ruling in this case?
Some of it. Quite frankly it's irrelevant. The Torah has already ruled on this-case closed. SCOTUS's decision makes no difference.
Next is a "right" to marry animals, then a right to marry trees, then rocks.Astonishing how the morals of the Western world and of this country have corroded so badly so fast.
A moral view. A historical view that has held sway since the beginning of civilization. Not an enlightened decision based on popular opinion.
I am not sure why government is in the marriage business in the first place. Marriage is an inherently religious exercise. Other than the name marriage let them make whatever contracts they wish between themselves.
Can I get your view on slavery?
When you decide on a new place to live that is ruled by religious laws I would read the fine print first.
Should the SCOTUS rule that belief in one G-D is mandatory?
If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began: “The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity,” I would hide my head in a bag. The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie.
As long as they understand the Holy Trinity is one G-D.
I don't expect you to relate to that part of what I'm saying by the religious Jews should. In fact we pray multiple times a day for the reestablishment of a the monarchy and state ruled by religious law. But also separate discussion.
Unless the SCOTUS rules that Aj3042 must marry a man I see no reason why the fact that Torah rules differently should have bearing on the SCOTUS's ruling.Should the SCOTUS rule that belief in one G-D is mandatory? Should they outlaw lobster?
...but don't you only want a certain religion to make the rules?
Tell that to the 1.5M Hindus in the US...
Appointed by Bush and he is the 5th Justice on all these liberal decisions.
Um... no he's not. Roberts was in the dissent today. And he was the 6th, not the swing, on healthcare.