Though I admit I didn't fully think idea through

A lot of the problems I see today, come from people making changes for the greater good without thinking about the future.

currently you can refuse unless they subpoena

The 5th amendment protects you from subpoena though

exactly

I can't be subpoenaed and forced to testify in my own case, neither can my spouse.

I have the right to remain silent, are right under the Fifth Amendment, add a spouse maintains that same right.

and if the idea for that is that it is a shared life, which is why a spouse is protected, i think that should apply to anyone who is living a shared life with someone else, regardless of if they applied for that protection.

Lads are you talkimg about that new court ruling ?

We're going full Convention of states in here

not anymore

but its related

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html

I dont know where i stand on this tbh

baker can refuse service to anyone

Thats my gut reaction

Government should just be does not compute about anything marriage

But then you can make shops for certain race only too

easy, do you believe in a business right to refuse business, or in private property rights, or in the right to associate with anyone you choose, or in limiting government power? if the answer to any of those is true, this is not a bad thing

With the same asumption

Marriage should be secularized, and the religious right of marriage should be left to the church

Where I am: People shouldn't give a fuck and everyone that does is a little brainlet, but businesses can refuse to deal with people for any reason.

@zutt that means blacks can make black only stores, or *cough* cinimas *cough* can have girls only nights.

Yes

Exactly

it also means you have a right to your private property, and your labor.

Well i believe there are laws in place against discrimination in service industry no ?

I remember they had to call off women only cinema screening

For law issues in states no ?

did they have to call that off?

i don't recall.

but that would also depend on the state i believe

My perspective is on separation of church and state. The religious Rite of marriage should not be protected by the courts, nor enforced by the courts. The right to the benefits of marriage however, should be.

They did call it off

What about gay marriage

it is not a sustainable thing, they cant have children

Nothing concerning the ceremony of marriage including birthday cakes and pastors should be enforceable by government.

should the govt have a contract with a gay couple?

The paperwork involved is it right

@Ivanfr should the government block them from adopting?

idk