Posted On: October 14, 2005, 2:51 pm CDT

Posted By: Gender Blind

I'm plagiarizing here, but...

You're correct that the phrase "separation of church and state" does not actually appear anywhere in the Constitution. There is a problem, however, in that some people (including you) draw incorrect conclusions from this fact. The absence of this phrase does not mean that it is an invalid concept or that it cannot be used as a legal or judicial principle.

There are any number of important legal concepts which do not appear in the Constitution with the exact phrasing people tend to use. For example, nowhere in the Constitution will you find words like "right to privacy" or even "right to a fair trial." Does this mean that no American citizen has a right to privacy or a fair trial? Does this mean that no judge should ever invoke these rights when reaching a decision?

Of course not - the absence of these specific words does not mean that there is also an absence of these ideas.

And once again, you're splitting hairs. Right now, you do have the privelege to marry. Gay couples do not. How is that equal treatment under the law? Would I do personally marry another man? No. But what gives me the right to tell two consenting adults that they can't marry simply because they're the same gender? You want to talk about silliness? That seems like case and point right there. And again, your very words support my point. The fact that someone else does something that in no way harms me or anyone else shouldn't be illegal simply because the morality of the majority disagrees!

I couldn't agree more that the overly litigious society we live in has trivialized the legal system to an extent and bogged it down with meaningless cases that do nothing but waste resources.