Most recent public comments by Melissa Aparicio https://nowcomment.com/users/15645 https://nowcomment.com/documents/37888?scroll_to=365423 https://nowcomment.com/documents/37888?scroll_to=365423 The article states "Constitutional individual rights are -- by their very nature-- counter majoritarian." - there is no lie. James Madison had given us the ideas to protect from the majority. It was one of his major points, he had no faith in humanity, and he refused to give anyone more power than they could handle - hence the two separate houses. Religious agendas should, also, not affect the way the government runs. These are basic human rights. There is a law that states we must keep religion and government separated- so why is it constantly a problem? We have allowed for interracial marriage- as the article had state later on- because it was seen as inhumane to deny people this right. Back then, there was racism and there were people who did not accept the fact that people are allowed to marry of different race. Yet now it's accepted. One of the arguments is to allow states to vote on whether or not to let gay marriage occur- to let states decide on that. Well, it's the same thing, interracial marriage was allowed in some states until later it was enforced through the government, the federal government. People got used to it. Whoever anyone marries should not affect such a person in such a matter. It is the federal government, there are laws for this exact reason. To keep biased and religious feelings out of it- and to look at everything in large view. The problem is is that we're allowing religion to mix with government when this should not happen. Fri, 11 Sep 2015 22:24:20 -0400