Source: Tesla Motors
quote: In an absolute sense, or within limits? For instance, I don't think anyone should be allowed to drive tanks: the weight plus the tracks will ruin pretty much any road they touch... There are other considerations as well that have to do with general welfare: excessive toxic emissions out of the tailpipe or excessively leaking oil/coolant fluids, for instance, or excessive engine noise, or being unsafe to operate for whatever reason. In other words, it is perfectly within the government's role to protect other people from damage you might cause them through your choice of vehicle (or really, through any other choices.)
quote: Completely off-topic, but since you brought it up, the government is involved because it chooses to impose special privileges and benefits, as well as obligations, on married people (e.g. tax savings, parental/visitation/medical/estate rights, child care/child support, etc.) For the purposes of conferring these privileges and obligations, government must necessarily define what it means by "marriage". This is a purely secular (non-religious) matter, in particular as it must apply to all irrespective of specific religion or lack thereof, and as such operates and applies only within the secular spheres of governance. Apropos:
quote: You're right, and the government wasn't and isn't trying to do any such thing. If you heard otherwise, then you were being lied to (and I'd take it up with your 'sources'.) Government can and must define marriage only and purely in terms of a civil institution (because the government's sphere of activity encompasses the civil repercussions of marriage and procreation.) To those who insist that marriage is an entirely religious institution, I always pose this question: should atheists or agnostics be prohibited from marrying? To those who insist that marriage makes sense only in the context of procreation, I ask this: are infertile (or otherwise incapable of reproduction -- e.g. through injury, disease, or old age) people allowed to marry, and is there no such thing as a marriage of convenience or a marriage in absence of sexual relations?
quote: Why should two people need permission from the state though to marry? Marriage licenses originally came about to prevent minorities from marrying. Two people, through a church or otherwise, should just be able to take vows and be married. To the state and federal government that shouldn't matter. People can handle their property on their own. Just require notarized documents for things to be valid in the event of a dispute.
quote: But if I, a consumer, choose to buy and drive a semi-truck every day, I should be able to.
quote: Now as far as emissions you may deem as dangerous, where is the federal government's authority to regulate such a thing? It doesn't exist.
quote: If the federal government wants to regulate that, Congress should pass a Constitutional amendment to do so.
quote: I don't see why the issue of marriage has to be brought into those things at all at the federal level.
quote: The current administration is telling Christian chaplains in the military that they have to perform a service for whoever wants it. No matter the beliefs of their faith.
quote: You also act like marriage has always been something the state or federal government was always involved in.
quote: So what? The government was not always involved with regulation of electricity or airspace, either. Yet, here we are. Times change. We aren't a tiny little backwater with a handful of mostly-rural and self-sufficient people any longer; we're a highly-integrated modern 300 million strong industrialized nation. The rules of the Wild West don't and can't work in the modern context.
quote: There should be no limits on Government power.
quote: There are obvious Constitutional limits, and furthermore newsflash: you (and all the other people of the nation) constitute the ultimate limit on what Government does or doesn't do. Don't look for the Constitution to do your job for you.
quote: The Founders knew better than anyone the dangers of a pure Democracy and sought to insulate the Government from the whims of the common voter.
quote: Don't look for the Constitution to do my job for me? What kind of trollish sophomoric bullshit is that anyway?