"…who also came up with the falsehood of "muh separation of church and state" which was never written in the constitution.”
Small quibble. Supreme Court decisions ARE part of the Constitution. Think of them as footnotes in the margin. So, when you get to the First Amendment, then there’s an *, and down at the bottom, *Which means church/state separation, IAW Everson v. Board of Education (1947).
Hope this helps.
“It was these same Freemasons that banned prayer from the public schools during Engel V. Vitale, a case submitted by a Jew who lied saying that prayer in public schools was forcing religion in 1962.”
Um, even if the plaintiff lied, six out of seven of the judges agreed with him and upheld that thought. Coerced prayers are not Constitutional.
"Seeing how immoral an action that led to such a destruction in the nation's cultural fabric and unity,”
If our culture is really a Christain culture, then not being able to force kids to pray at school for 30 hours a week, should not DESTROY that culture in the other 138 hours of the week.
“ The very time of the breakdown of morality was the time interracial marriage and later abortion were approved as morally and legally acceptable in our culture and that should cause some people's heads to scratch.”
No one said anything about morally in either case. What they said was that the Constitution, as a secular document, doesn’t provide a secular basis to ban interracial marriages, or to completely ban abortions.
“ God set down the rules of marriage so that we don't mess up our lives”
Yeah, marry your rape victim, marry your slave taken in battle, marry a few hundred partners if you’re rich, Some really good rules, there.
“and the more dysfunctional something is, the further it is removed from God's intended design.”
Really? But, I’ve been IN a mixed-race marriage for 39 years. Haven’t cheated on her once. Raised three kids. Been at her side before surgeries, she’d been at mine... Seems pretty functional, really.
“Interracial marriages in almost all cases end in divorce at a higher rate”
Almost all cases have a higher rate of divorce? What a worthless claim.
EITEHER they have a higher rate or they do not. EITHER almost all cases end in divorce or they do not. You’re just throwing shit at the wall to see if it sticks.
And this is not a justification for banning interracial marriages. Even if all marriages are a 50% chance of failure, they’re still allowed to try.
"Others have used interracial marriage as the moral excuse for allowing homosexuality.”
Not any place I’ve seen. Rather, in 1967, people insisted that if we allowed interracial marriages, then gay marriage was inevitably going to follow. Look how long it actually took? Therreis no slippery slope.