Not sure why I am even bothering but here goes. The point in the reference to abolition was in comment to a previous poster saying a religious view has no place in a discussion - only the law on the books. MY point (please read slowly and reread if necessary) was that laws have and still do change based on religious viewpoints. People do not just accept the law on the books. Clearly as in the case with gay marriage, people do not accept law as necessarily being right. In the case of abolition, slavery was not only law but Constitution as well. With the logic used by this particular poster, anyone opposed to slavery on any grounds , much less moral and religious grounds, should have accepted what the law and especially the Constitution said and left it at that. I mean after all, how dare ANY Christian come and object to our sacred law and Constitution and wish to impose their morality on others, right?
Again read slowly if need be....there is a place for personal beliefs in law and in changing law. For some it is a religious viewpoint instilled in them. Others it may be some other moral standards influenced by who knows what. Point is a religious view has a place in our society. And we actually owe some of the greatest changes to the same religious view that some see as having NO place in the forum of government, law, politics, etc.
