rec.arts.movies.past-films

kfw1206@ wrote:
> On Sep 14, 12:31 am, "M. Rick" wrote:
>>> Religious believers have as much right to vote according to their views as
>> atheists do.
>>
>> Religious people can vote to enact any law they choose, but in America, that
>> law must meet constitutional standards. Hence the problem with codifying
>> and maintaining religious prohibitions relating to homosexuality.
>
> As noted, the arguments arguments I've made depend on natural law and/
> or practicality, not religion.
>
>>From Child Trends, a mainstream child-welfare organization: "research
> clearly demonstrates that family structure matters for children, and
> the family structure that helps the most is a family headed by two
> biological parents in a low-conflict marriage. Children in single-
> parent families, children born to unmarried mothers, and children in
> stepfamilies or cohabiting relationships face higher risks of poor
> outcomes... There is thus value for children in promoting strong,
> stable marriages between biological parents."
>
You've been throwing this "natural law" term around quite a bit now.
There are many ways to interpret this term. What do you mean by it?