How the Establishment Clause eliminates the Gay Marriage debate

I can't believe that I didn't see this before. I'm also surprised that the Supreme Court didn't mention it in any of their rulings on the issue. I'm not at all surprised that the ultra-conservative religious crowd didn't want to mention this in any of their 'public debates' on the subject. I put the words 'public debates' in quotes because the so-called debate on the matter has just devolved into yet another screaming match between Clowns on the Left and Jokers on the Right.

Anyway, I have good news for both queer couples looking for a 'Boston Marriage' and religious nut-jobs alike. You can both have your proverbial wedding cake and eat it too. (And honestly, who doesn't just love wedding cake? It's delicious!)

This whole issue was already solved a long time ago. Specifically, it was solved by President George Washington and his Congress back in 1791 when they passed the Bill of Rights and made them law. Specifically, it was the First Amendment that serendipitously solved this issue about 200 years before it even became part of the public discourse.

The text of the First Amendment reads as follows:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I put the first sentence in bold to add emphasis since that line states my entire point. Gay marriage is a social issue, not a political one. The government can't deny gay people from marrying each other based solely on religious right-wingers saying that a verse in Leviticus says Homosexuality is wrong. Therefore, there's no real reason why the government can't pass/modify laws about marriage simply because of a religious objection from church-goin' types. That's the good news for the Homosexuals who think marriage is a good idea. (And sometimes it's not. Be careful with that decision, folks.)

The good news for the Religious crowd is, again, what that establishment clause says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

So, even though Uncle Sam can't make a law forbidding gay marriage on religious grounds, they also can't pass a law forcing a church to perform a marriage ceremony for gay couples. Clergymen are still free to politely refuse to perform those ceremonies. And if you do, I personally recommend that you refer them to another clergyman that will or the local Justice of the Peace. That way, assuming they attend services at your church, you might not lose those two homosexuals as congregants.

There. This non-issue is solved. Score yet another one for the truly gifted Founders & Framers. Can we now focus on the much more pressing issues like the non-sensical tax code, pointless perpetual wars and government getting too big for its proverbial britches?

- Lord Publius