Why we need Parliamentary Procedure in the USA.

Let's talk about "Separation of Church and State" for a little bit.

Two domestic issues immediately come to mind.
1. Marriage Equality
2. Women's Reproductive Rights

The key element that ties both of these issues together is Religious Justification.

Consider: what are laws and legislation in place for? Usually, they're there to keep us happy, healty, and generally speaking, fair. Laws are what make us civilized. They are what defines the parameters of acceptable human behavior. They are necessary for maintaining order and peace.

Ask: how and why are certain laws formed? The answer varies vastly from one law to the next. The reason you can't steal your neighbor's car is because he paid for it, and that would be unfair to him. The reason you can't murder people is because human life is valuable. Right?

So, we are also supposed to have this concept in Amerrrrrica today known as "Separation of Church and State."

HA!

Ask the question, "why can't homosexuals get married?" and there's no real legal answer. There is a lot of humdrum about "protecting the sanctity of marriage."

So let's for a moment analyze that. The "sanctity of marriage" as set forth by who? Well, the primary opponents to Marriage Equality are Xtians. Yes, there's a trend here. Xtians believe that God has set fourth this rule that girls aren't supposed to boink other girls, and guys should keep their penises out of other guys' asses/mouths/wherever. So, SEX is the real stickler here. Those Xtians just can't STAND the idea that two people of the same sex boinking each other could be sacred, because it is (supposedly) forbidden in their religion.

So, this controversial issue comes down to Religious Belief. As an Atheist, I really don't care who puts what where, and I don't think this should be the only criteria for determining if two people should be allowed to express their love for each other in the most meaningful way they can. (As well as getting basic human rights that other couples get such as benefits.) The whole reason there's even a question about this is because Xtians don't like it.

Therefore, as it IS a Religious Belief, the government should really have nothing to say on the matter. If we really do have something called "Separation of Church and State," this should be obvious to everyone that there's no real issue here, besides the fact that Xtians are persecuting people for their beliefs, alienating themselves from the rest of society, and OH YEAH... taking away people's basic human rights... (which they complain is being done to them in record proportion) Where's the law against that?

So, the same principle applies to Women's Reproductive Rights.

The question here is, is abortion bad, and should therefore be illegal? In order to answer that, we have to look at why abortion is considered bad by some people. Mostly, the people who oppose abortion are convinced that the "baby is being murdered." Again, we go down the logic line in the cafeteria: why is murder bad? Because it destroys a human life. Why is that wrong? Because we have souls and .... WAIT... here's an interesting point of view..

Again, as an Atheist, I have to argue here. I personally don't believe we do have a "soul" specifically. But even if we do have a soul, where's the scientific evidence that shows WHEN a soul enters a body? Is it at conception, as the Catholics believe, or when the baby takes its first breath, or somewhere in between? And if Gary Willis is right, and Science is the answer, shouldn't we outlaw eating meat as well, since killing is bad? Or are we saying that baby humans are somehow better than baby cows? So. Many. Questions.

The fact of the matter is, you cannot answer that question scientifically. You cannot prove that there is a soul, or if human babies have more rights than cow babies or chicken babies. Even if you could you cannot prove when the soul attaches itself to the body, or if it ever does. So how can we make a law based upon the loose beliefs of... wait for it......... Xtians? Laws should not be made to forestall some eventual fear, but should be made on a scientific basis.

In Parliamentary Procedure (to summarize for all those un-cultured folks out there) if a speaker so much as hints at God, Gods, Souls, Faith, or Religion of any kind, typically their remarks are stricken from the public record, sometimes they are asked to leave, and in some cases asked never to return. And that's IF they aren't just laughed right out of the room. All in all, it seems like a much classier way to run things.

Jesus would smack the shit out of you.