Wyoming's motto: "The Equality State"
Recently, the State of Wyoming, also known as "The Equality State," passed legislation that voids marriages of same sex couples if they move into the state, the targeted group: those liberal Massachusetts perverts. Here's a letter to the editor that appeared in the Sheridan Press that voices some reason:
February 7th, 2007
Editor,
Marriage is a legal term. It shouldn't be.
Marriage originated in ancient desert societies from which Judaism and Christianity arose.
Its purpose; establish guidelines for property distribution, secure the success of the human species, and preserve bloodlines. Spouses could treat each other as well or as poorly as they chose.
Marriage is a dying institution. It should be.
It might shock you to hear that I do not support gay marriage. But I don't support heterosexual marriage either.
"Marriage" is an antiquated term. It is a term that intrinsically denotes exclusively heterosexual unions and religious custom. Which is what it what meant for.
Today, marriage legally establishes only financial union. Why should this be extended only to heterosexual couple?
The many same-sex couples in this country are denied this because of whom they love. If people want to become life partners, a financial union is the only nod we should get from the courts.
If people want to have a ceremony in a church with their church traditions, fine. But as far as the law goes, it should be termed a union, not a marriage.
This country was founded by people who knew that freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of being are essential for a good nation of good people.
The very term "marriage" goes against our First Amendment, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the agree exercise thereof."
"Marriage" is a religious term "Marriage" should stay in the church, not in legal unions.
When our Senate passed Senate File 13, we ignored our grounding principles. It is not okay to judge someone or deny financial benefits based on whom they love.
How many more ways can we not be the "Equality State?"
Mara Sobotka
Laramie, WY
It's nice to see somebody in the state voice some reason about the differentiation of the legal and religious applications of marriages/unions because most people are not willing to face that whole separation of church and state thing that we (as Americans) supposedly adhere to:
February 13th, 2007
Editor,
In Response to comments from Ms. Mara Sobotka, Laramie, dated Feb. 7:
Marriage (a lifelong commitment between one man and one women, terminated only by death of one or both) was created by almighty God. Period. It did not originate from some "ancient desert society."
Remember the day that an old man responded to your (letter) when you stand in divine judgment to answer for your ideology,
Dan Roberts
Big Horn, WY
A cunning response indeed.
February 7th, 2007
Editor,
Marriage is a legal term. It shouldn't be.
Marriage originated in ancient desert societies from which Judaism and Christianity arose.
Its purpose; establish guidelines for property distribution, secure the success of the human species, and preserve bloodlines. Spouses could treat each other as well or as poorly as they chose.
Marriage is a dying institution. It should be.
It might shock you to hear that I do not support gay marriage. But I don't support heterosexual marriage either.
"Marriage" is an antiquated term. It is a term that intrinsically denotes exclusively heterosexual unions and religious custom. Which is what it what meant for.
Today, marriage legally establishes only financial union. Why should this be extended only to heterosexual couple?
The many same-sex couples in this country are denied this because of whom they love. If people want to become life partners, a financial union is the only nod we should get from the courts.
If people want to have a ceremony in a church with their church traditions, fine. But as far as the law goes, it should be termed a union, not a marriage.
This country was founded by people who knew that freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of being are essential for a good nation of good people.
The very term "marriage" goes against our First Amendment, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the agree exercise thereof."
"Marriage" is a religious term "Marriage" should stay in the church, not in legal unions.
When our Senate passed Senate File 13, we ignored our grounding principles. It is not okay to judge someone or deny financial benefits based on whom they love.
How many more ways can we not be the "Equality State?"
Mara Sobotka
Laramie, WY
It's nice to see somebody in the state voice some reason about the differentiation of the legal and religious applications of marriages/unions because most people are not willing to face that whole separation of church and state thing that we (as Americans) supposedly adhere to:
February 13th, 2007
Editor,
In Response to comments from Ms. Mara Sobotka, Laramie, dated Feb. 7:
Marriage (a lifelong commitment between one man and one women, terminated only by death of one or both) was created by almighty God. Period. It did not originate from some "ancient desert society."
Remember the day that an old man responded to your (letter) when you stand in divine judgment to answer for your ideology,
Dan Roberts
Big Horn, WY
A cunning response indeed.
posted by -Peter- at
11:40 AM
0 Comments
