No religion is being disadvantaged here. Christianity does not lose face or is put into a difficult situation because of this.


I'm just as confused as you seem to be, so let's break this down.


What this means is that they cannot exhibit favoritism towards a religion. By denying same-sex couples marriage licenses, they are showing favoritism towards Christianity, Catholicism and Judaism, among others.


This is the part that you and Kim Davis have been marching around on a pedestal. She is free to exercise whatever religion she wants (within a few constraints such as not allowed to harm yourself, others or animals for religious ceremonies). However, she cannot bring her beliefs into the clerk office, because as soon as she clocks in, she is an agent of the government and must now abide by the first part of the above. There are lots of cases that the SCOTUS has interpreted which outline exactly what she can and cannot do, the most relevant of which that I found was the Garcetti v. Ceballos case.



No. I'm not playing your stupid little "I only read half a sentence before giving a rebuttal" game. Pay fucking attention. Corporations count as people and have the exact same rights as a person does. I don't necessarily agree with this because tax loopholes and stuff, but that's how it is.



You misread. I said business. Not businesses. Sales, profits, moolah. Denying left-foot-firsters would cut very deep into profits.



I was only saying that enacting a left-foot-first rule would be strange and not good.



I already said that the punishments will be more severe for the latter, but yes.



Just to be clear, the US is not a Christian nation. Never was. That's why the establishment clause of the first amendment even exists. That's why there is a separation of church and state. Oh, and marriage didn't come from Christianity. Anyone who read the first four or five books of the Bible would be able to tell you that.


Even if that was the case, legalizing same-sex marriage affects no one except for that couple. Even if marriage was a Christian institution, it no longer is just that, so any authority they would have on the matter is inconsequential.



She is salaried and her pay was not affected by her jail time.



Since you've said that the Constitution is not a set of laws, I would like you to confirm on the record that soldiers can commandeer your home, you are not entitled to a trial if arrested, you can keep slaves, and the government can deny blacks and women from voting. Unless you meant to say that the constitution as a whole is "the law" but is composed of "a laws".
-----

Salvador Dali was Spanish and only lived in the US for eight years after he had gotten married, and their marriage was not recognized in the US during that time. Elton John is British and married in England. Freddie Mercury never married his partner. Your argument is invalid on the grounds of ignorance.