Unfortunately, not everyone agrees whether the U.S. Constitution protects things like homosexuality from discrimination. Although Congress shall not establish a religion, the states are/were free to do as they liked.
Again, there is that slippery slope. If you allow the Government to interfere to control certain things, you are opening the door for the Government to control EVERYTHING.
I sure don't have the solution.
Not taking either side of the debate, but you know that is how it used to be, right? The states could have a state religion and, unfortunately, discriminate against whomever they wished. Some argue that by allowing the Federal laws to overrule the state's laws, the states have lost much of their independence. We are the United States, as in many independent states that have united together. Like so many other topics, this one is not so "cut and dry" as it may seem.
IMHO, Paul and Kucinich are lunatics, so no vote (or soup) for them.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, not everyone agrees whether the U.S. Constitution protects things like homosexuality from discrimination. Although Congress shall not establish a religion, the states are/were free to do as they liked. Again, there is that slippery slope. If you allow the Government to interfere to control certain things, you are opening the door for the Government to control EVERYTHING. I sure don't have the solution.
Not taking either side of the debate, but you know that is how it used to be, right? The states could have a state religion and, unfortunately, discriminate against whomever they wished. Some argue that by allowing the Federal laws to overrule the state's laws, the states have lost much of their independence. We are the United States, as in many independent states that have united together. Like so many other topics, this one is not so "cut and dry" as it may seem. IMHO, Paul and Kucinich are lunatics, so no vote (or soup) for them.
Or small pox...see "American Indian"