Conflict - Virginia Constitution

Good Morning.

Today I wanted to discuss with you the conflicting information that was written into the Virginia Constitution.

In Article I, Section 15-A, it states that only a union between a man and a woman may be a marriage. This amendment was added January 1, 2007. If you speak with any proponent of this amendment they will say they supported the amendment to protect the religious institution of marriage.

Now, not in a different document or even on a separate page is Article 1, Section 16. Free exercise of religion; no establishment of religion.

My question to you is: Can you see the conflict here? How could the government of Virginia completely ignore section 16 and the fact that marriage is a religious institution they have established as an amendment in section 15 of the same constitution.

This says nothing of the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. Section 15 goes against everything these documents were written to protect. They were intended to protect the rights of the religious minority against the religious views of the majority.

Has everyone become so ignorant that they have forgotten what these documents mean and why they were written?

Virginia has successfully segregated our population based on a religious creed that has now become written into the very fabric of our constitution.

I would like answers from our historians, our law makers, and our government as to how this oversight was allowed to happen?

When we start placing our religious views before our freedoms we will start to loose them both.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Marriage
• GLBT
• Equality
• Virginia

[Shannaro18]

While I support "gay marriage" it's actually not really against the law, or "oversight" as you say it. I should also mention that I'm a HUGE freedom supporter-- in *every way. I just think we should do it right.

In the case you're discussing, lawmakers said they made this decision because of their religious beliefs. But there is a difference in preventing religious practice and making a law that agrees with the moral code of certain religion. That;s why the amendment, while annoying, is legit

[kdkmo]

There are both religious and secular marriages. You can get married in a church or a courthouse. California has approved same sex marriage in their courthouses but has not required churches to perform them or recognize them. The amendment in the state constitution does not seem to me to be in conflict. Since CA is a bellweather state you can bet that eventually same sex marriage will be common in all of the states. That's life in the USA today.