To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (216553 ) 8/22/2007 12:22:41 PM From: epicure Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793755 Depends. I mean is pork eating religious? Is it always religious? Would you say definitionally that discussing pork eating is a religious issue? If the motivation for the action is religious, then you're talking religion. If it's an honor killing somewhere like communist China, and not religiously motivated, then you are talking a societal thing- and not religion. And of course in Mass gay marriage is legal and this is not like a criminal action. Odd that you should use that. I used eating pork because as far as I know that's not a crime anywhere in the US (except maybe in the Vegan Highlands of Seattle) Again, I go back to pork. You can MAKE it about religion- but it isn't for everyone, and just because it is for some, does not really (logically) mean the some should control the rest of us. They can, of course, should they be able to take control of the state, but I see no logical reason why we should have to say the two things are necessarily the set of "religion". Abortion, for example, upsets the religious, but I am not religious, and I don't like it either. On the other hand, there are religious people who do not seem terribly upset by it, and people who are not religious who are not upset either. Abortion is not per se a religious issue. Like honor killings, or marriage, or gay marriage, or pork, or birthday parties (swear to God- Jehova's Witnesses don't celebrate these). You can make all these things and oh so many more, about religion, but that does not logically mean they are definitionally religious, because they aren't.contenderministries.org I was afraid some might not believe me about birthday parties- have posted a link :-)