<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Comments by Jocelyne Nunez</title>
    <description>Most recent public comments by Jocelyne Nunez</description>
    <link>https://nowcomment.com/users/15635</link>
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://nowcomment.com/users/15635/comments"/>
    <item>
      <title>Religious agendas are not, and should not be, national law because the first amendment is a thing that exists. </title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/37888?scroll_to=365222</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/37888?scroll_to=365222</guid>
      <description>It's interesting that the article mentions the first amendment right to freedom of religion, considering the topic of discussion. Freedom of religion also implies freedom from religion and, frankly, every argument against gay marriage has religious foundations. The first amendment protects people of faith, but it does not give religious people the power to deny a fundamental right to another human being. Thus, to deny homosexual couples the right to marry because of the religious doctrines of the majority is utterly unconstitutional. If such a decision were left for individual states to decide indefinitely, members of the LGBT+ community, particularly in the Bible Belt, would eternally and wrongly be deprived of the basic right to pursue a relationship with whomever they please. The only way to avoid the oppression of the minority by the majority, in this case, is to leave the decision completely out of reach of the ordinary citizen and of state legislatures and to place full responsibility in the hands of the Supreme Court, instead.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2015 02:16:57 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
