Tune in at 16:00 London, 19:00 UAE

Live from Abu Dhabi Connect the World takes you on a journey across continents, investigating the stories that are changing our world.

Live from Abu Dhabi Connect the World takes you on a journey across continents, investigating the stories that are changing our world.

Are you in favor of or against gay marriage?

August 9th, 2010
01:36 PM ET

Are you in favor of gay marriage or are you against it? (Getty Images)

(CNN) Supporters of gay rights are still celebrating a federal judge's ruling last week in California that struck down the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage as a violation of the U.S. Constitution. 

The decision was a major victory in a case that both sides say is sure to wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court and could result in a landmark decision on whether people everywhere in the United States should be allowed to marry people of the same-sex. 

Same-sex marriage is currently legal in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, Iowa, New Hampshire and the District of Columbia, while civil unions are permitted in New Jersey.

Last week, Mexico's Supreme Court, on an 8-2 vote, upheld the constitutionality of a Mexico City law that took effect in March. 

Worldwide, 10 countries have legalized same-sex marriage - most recently Argentina at the end of July. 

Many other countries have approved civil unions and registered partnerships and still others are debating a legal status for gay people. 

Supporters of gay marriage believe it is a universal human rights issue and gay and lesbian couples should be entitled to the same rights as heterosexual couples. 

Some opponents argue that the institution of marriage is a religious one and, as such, should exclude same-sex partnerships. 

Other opponents argue against gay marriage on the basis of tradition or concerns about parenting. 

Despite the growing number of countries, predominantly in the west, that allow same-sex marriage or recognize civil unions, homosexual behavior is still illegal in countries like Pakistan, Nigeria, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates. 

As the debate heats up around the world, we want to hear from you. 

CNN International will be bringing you a special program dedicated to the issue on Thursday, August 12 at 2000 GMT on Connect the World. 

We want to hear your thoughts on the issue from around the world and would love to share them on our show. 
If you are interested in appearing in our special program to voice your opinion, please let us know, otherwise please leave your thoughts below on the issue. 
Remember to tell us where you're writing from too. 
Posted by ,
Filed under:  General
soundoff (404 Responses)
  1. Chuck Anziulewicz

    While it's true that the Constitution doesn't define "marriage," the federal government has complicated the issue by taking a vested interest in married couples for the purposes of tax law and Social Security (among the 1,138 legal benefits, protections, and responsibilities that are automatically bestowed on couples once they marry). Therefore this is not an issue that can be left up to the states to decide individually, since it wouldn't do for a Gay couple that is legally married in Iowa, for instance, to become automatically UN-married once they decide to move somewhere else.

    Religious beliefs are irrelevant to this debate, because (1) the United States is not theocracy, and (2) churches will continue to be free to conduct or deny ceremonies to whomever they want.

    Procreation and parenting are irrelevant, since (1) couples do not have to marry to have children, and (2) the ability or even desire to have children is not a prerequisite for getting a marriage license.

    This is simply a matter of equal treatment under the law.

    The quest for marriage equality by Gay couples has absolutely nothing to do with Straight (i.e. heterosexual) couples. Nothing is changing for them. Nothing is happening to “traditional marriage.” Most people are Straight, and they will continue to date, get engaged, marry and build lives and families together as they always have. None of that will change by allowing Gay couples to do the same. This is really not any sort of a “sea change” for marriage, since the only difference between Gay and Straight couples is the gender of the two persons in the relationship.

    August 9, 2010 at 1:47 pm | Reply
  2. Mark Zawadzki

    Add #3 to the irrelevancy of procreation ... older/infertile couples. By the logic that marriage is for procreation I should not be marrying my post – menopausal fiancee. Should a survivor of bilateral testicular/ovarian cancer be kept from marriage ?

    August 9, 2010 at 2:03 pm | Reply
  3. Bob Carnevali

    There is no "gay marriage" or "same-sex marriage", it's just "marriage". Detractors call it something different so that people will believe it is something different, then claim that "new" rights are being granted. They're not. The Supreme Court has decided time and time again that marriage is a fundamental right to ALL citizens. If you want to pass a law that says "we want to deny that right to certain people," then you have to have a compelling reason why it should be allowed, and you have to prove it. Gay individuals don't want a "same-sex" marriage, they just want a regular marriage like everyone else. Yet Californians, for some reason, felt the need to try to take that right away from them. When told they have to give valid reasons and proof why they should be able to deny those people their right to marry, they were unable to.

    It's about time people realized that no matter how you feel about it, you don't have a monopoly on marriage. You can't tell other citizens that they shouldn't have the same rights as you for no reason other than your own personal feelings. Our Constitution gives everyone equal treatment. It doesn't treat anyone as a second-class citizen.

    August 9, 2010 at 2:03 pm | Reply
  4. E Follansbee

    Being married for 57 years and going onto 58, I approve of marriage between two people. Committment(sp) is the operative word here. It's promiscuity I object to!

    August 9, 2010 at 2:05 pm | Reply
  5. Charlie

    The funny thing is that right wing religious groups are struggling to subject the rest of the country to their homophobic views. We are not a theocracy in the United States. I think it is very important for Americans to really listen to and read what these people say about gay people, don't just listen to the sounds clips in the media, actually take some time to see what they really say, not just recently but in the past as well. Their new tactic is to try to look like the victims when nothing could be further from the truth.

    And as far as actual marriage is concerned, If you are an opposite sex couple and you want to marry in the US you need to get a marriage license from the GOVERNMENT in order to be legally married, not a license from your CHURCH, and if you want to get divorced you need to get this through the GOVERNMENT as well. It's important to actually read the 14th Amendment and really think about what that means. If the government is responsible for handling marriage and divorce then this is a civil right.

    It is telling that the polls show that the younger generation does not see this as an issue and in fact by a vast majority supports gay marriage. Civil rights for gay people will happen very soon thanks to the younger generation!

    August 9, 2010 at 2:13 pm | Reply
  6. stevie68a

    The churches have been stealing from Gay people long enough.
    Gays, who pay taxes, are denied basic civil rights, The church, who is tax exempt, affect public policy on Gay people.
    I would send the church to hell, if there were such a place. For now, lets
    leave them in the middle ages with their folklore and superstition.
    Whatever good there is in religion, can be had without religion.
    It is trickery, superstition, and shame.
    People who want to "save marriage" have their work cut out for them.
    Start with the incredibly high divorce rate.

    August 9, 2010 at 2:14 pm | Reply
  7. C Findley

    It is becoming an embarassment, displaying before the world, that we have strayed so far from God. Immorality is no longer immoral.

    August 9, 2010 at 2:17 pm | Reply
  8. J.M. Hodgden

    Marriage is a sacrament of the church and as such is untouchable by our secular government. Marriages performed by the government are nothing more than a contractual documentation that mimics the sacrement of the church. Secular means Godless! Should anybody be surprised which direction our secular government would react?

    All those who violate the sacraments of God are going to have to answer to God, not man, and God could care less what their excuses or opinions are. Only His counts and that's what His detractors keep forgetting. As Jesus said, "Render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's." The gays are of a secular spirit as is our government and so let them have their secular marriage. Just don't expect Christians to violate their God's sacraments in Satan's bed. Keep the two separate. Don't comingle the sacraments with legaleze. "Congress shall write no law establishing a religion."

    August 9, 2010 at 2:24 pm | Reply
  9. Dan McGill

    The slippery slope in this country and the p.c,people slay me.I dont care what people do behind closed doors,I do care when its in my face,and I dont like it. THIS WILL PROBABLY WONT BE POSTED ,AS IT DOES NOT GO ALONG WITH THE AGENDA.

    August 9, 2010 at 2:24 pm | Reply
  10. Ed Holt

    Yes I am in favor of gay marriages! I do not believe that anyone should be singled out because of their lifestyle, life choices or other differences. I am an African American heterosexual...go figure,,,

    August 9, 2010 at 2:30 pm | Reply
  11. David Peterson

    Marriage is an institution ordained by God thousands of years before the US Constitution. The framers of that document did not attempt to define it within the document because they knew it was beyond their authority. The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution gave all citizens the right of equal treatment under law. It did not give them any new rights.
    If this concept is too hard for some Federal Judges to understand, it is time to repeal the Amendment. In November, ask your candidates whether they stand on this issue and if you don't get an answer, or don't like their answer, vote for the other guy.

    August 9, 2010 at 2:37 pm | Reply
  12. Walter

    the problem with this whole thing is that the state is trying to dictate what marriage is when it is not a state issue. The state did not create marriage...religion did. This is a case when the all too popular "separation of church and state" should come in. Thus when religion states that marriage is only between a husband and wife, they are right...because it is something viewed to have been created by God. Jesus Himself stated in the gospels that a man would leave his family to cleave to a wife in reference to Genesis' creation of the first marriage between Adam and Eve. Whether you agree to this or not is not the issue. The fact remains: religion dictates what are the proper terms of marriage since it came out from them...the state does not. It has no say in the matter.
    Marriage is not an "evolutionary" invention. It can't since it doesn't help with increase of the species nor natural selection. It is totally religious.

    August 9, 2010 at 2:54 pm | Reply
  13. Andy Johnson

    I am gay but I don't agree to same-sex marriage as just like in the UK, people are abusing such 'rights' to gain citizenship, benefits etc.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:02 pm | Reply
  14. charles

    God help us..............What is this world turning to?

    August 9, 2010 at 3:04 pm | Reply
  15. Richard Foster

    It shouldn't even be a question in these days. It's the 21st Century, for God's sake!
    I'm sicking of hearing literal segments of the Holy Bible to argument against the union of two people that love each other.
    Besides, we're NOT discussing religion here. It's a matter of RIGHTS.
    Doesn't the Federal Constitution state that the religion will NOT interfere in the State's matters? So, what's the point? It's all so non sense, that I sincerely don't know what else to say!!!

    Halifax, NS – Canada

    August 9, 2010 at 3:05 pm | Reply
  16. Carlos

    Because some states and governments are tolerant and political on this issue, that does not mean it is correct and the best for Human Kind. Let respect the voice of the people and not the opinion of a Judge.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:07 pm | Reply
  17. Chuck Anziulewicz


    If marriage is a totally religious issue, state and federal governments should have nothing to do with it. But none of the legal benefits, protections, and responsibilities that go to married couples come from the church. They come from the government.

    It is not the purpose of government, nor of the Constitution, to make things "sacred." Those who believe that marriage is sacred usually choose to be married in a religious ceremony. Gay couples may or may not be making a religious or moral statement; though most Christian denominations do not recognize such commitment, some do. Regardless, Gay couples simply wish to be legally bound to each other by law. We wish to have all the same privileges of any lifelong couple.

    If the government still considers "marriage" to be a religious designation rather than a legal one, it has no business making any laws concerning that institution. If, as confirmed by its actions, the government believes "marriage" to be a legal contract, it has no business denying that contract to any two people, no matter what their gender might be.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:08 pm | Reply
  18. Paulo A. Pereira

    Well, all the fuss about gay marriage is ultimately patronized by religions in general. No one else in his right mind should have any objections against it.

    After all, my point of view is that the marriage in itself is nothing more than a piece of paper with legal meaning and value attached to it. So there's really not much about marriage that the law should be concerned about.

    But, what marriage is really about, as Steve quite properly said, it is about Commitment, and without it marriage means nothing at all. And commitment is sex-independent.

    As long as there is true commitment, love and respect between a couple, gender is not relevant, and it strikes me as some kind of perversion to define marriage based on sex of the "participants".

    August 9, 2010 at 3:09 pm | Reply
  19. Alexander Supertramp

    This judge is bogus. He said there is no evidence that children are harmed in the gay environment. One of the plaintiff's main arguments is that there is all this bias against gays.

    Their own expert, Dr. Meyer, testified that this bias supposedly is the cause of serious mental and physical health issues of gays. But in cross-examination, he admitted that other minorities that experience discrimination don't have anywhere near the level of mental and physical health issues.

    Another of the plaintiff's experts, Dr. Lamb, testified that children of parents with these issues are harmed by the problems. So how can the judge ignore this evidence?

    August 9, 2010 at 3:09 pm | Reply
  20. Nathan Cooper

    @ Andy Johnson .. yeah because the sham marriages happen in the gay world ONLY they never happen in the Straight World you dumb.. i never understood why people want marriage in the first place.. if u and love are confident, loyal and proud of ur relationship, u don;t need a piece of paper to tell u that..
    if u ask me, I think the straight people are the ones who should ask for marriage cancellations since it is a DIRECT interference from Religion because it controls EVERY LITTLE DETAIL OF THEIR LIVES..

    August 9, 2010 at 3:10 pm | Reply
  21. mary-margaret burkholder

    LOVE is LOVE!!! I am pro same-sex marriage and those marriage rights for all people!!

    August 9, 2010 at 3:12 pm | Reply
  22. Keoki Kanaloa'a

    I find quite comical the arguments from my "conservative Tea Baggers"....

    They despise the Theocratic Goverment of Iran....yet, want to impose a theocratic argument to ban whatever suits them....in this case, it happens to be gay marriage; next year, it could very well be eating shrimp (also prohibited by Leviticus, incidentally)

    They scream louder than our Hawaiian Tsunami Warning syrens to invoke "States' Rights" – in order to defend the flying of the Confederate Flag over South Carolina's, Georgia's and Mississippi's Capitols ... yet, are now asking the Supreme Court, the Senate and whatever Branch of the Federal Goverment would-listen-to-them, in order to ban same-gender couples from marrying.

    They preach about the "Sanctity of Marriage" and how James & Kevin's New York Times Wedding Annouoncement will exterminate just about every heterosexual marriage in America.... yet, ignore the topic of "Divorce"..... possible out of convinience, as I wonder how many of this theocratic Tea Baggers have been divorced, not once, but twice ! (...amen, Rush – you are heading for your fourth one ?)

    Other reasonable Societies / Countries have tackled this issue – and nothing, nothing, NOTHING has happened....Life goes on....

    Could we somehow tell the Theocrats to head to Iran.
    Not only it founded in theocratic principles, but aslo, according to their President – there are no gays at all..... so "no issue" !

    August 9, 2010 at 3:14 pm | Reply
  23. jamesayodele

    gay marriage immoral and should be discourage in every society.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:17 pm | Reply
  24. eva, geneva

    come on, everybody – calm down.
    why is everyone acting like we are taking something away from you? it's not the case. have your straight marriages and let us have ours.
    and PLEASE: put the bible in the closet.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:17 pm | Reply
  25. James Wardell

    I believe your constitution says that all men are created equal. You've even updated it to include women, haven't you?
    Well, to quote George Orwell "All animals are created equal...but some are more equal than others." (Animal Farm)

    J. Wardell
    Mt. Albert, Ontario, Canada

    August 9, 2010 at 3:18 pm | Reply
  26. Jameson

    No culture or civilization in the world history has ever recognized marriage
    of two members of the same gender. No religious leader or philosopher has supported it. How could they all be wrong and we, somehow, right?
    Jesus, Mohamed, Krishna, Moses, Buddha – Greece, Egypt, Rome, China, India, Europe – etc. Aren't we rather arrogant? If we change the temperature of the planet one degree we have a problem. How can we change the very foundation of human society to something it has never ever been with impunity?

    August 9, 2010 at 3:22 pm | Reply
  27. Alec

    I'm gay, and I think it is inevitable that gay marriage will be legalized coast to coast (if not worldwide) in the near future. I feel no urgency, therefore, in legalizing gay marriage (personally, I'm not interested in it).

    I do, however, see harm in rushing that legalization. If you insist upon it too much or prematurely - before people have a chance to see, through personal experience, that is either harmless or positive - various sectors of American society will violently reject it and homosexuals, perhaps permanently. And that will be a long-lasting setback for gays in general. I think we've seen this process before with other minorities in American history, and I don't want to see it happen to homosexuals.

    I also think the difference between 'marriage' and 'civil unions' is a bit of semantics. What matters is the legal benefits granted to a couple. If gays are granted 'civil unions' with every benefit, and 'marriage' is reserved for religion, I'm perfectly happy with that.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:23 pm | Reply
  28. Paulo A. Pereira

    Well, all the fuss about gay marriage is based upon religious views, dogmae and misconconception, and it should not be taken into account at all.

    In my opinion, marriage is nothing but a document with some legal implications for the people who “engage” into it. The real and only Human value associated with marriage, as Steve very properly pointed out, is COMMITMENT. Without it, marriage and everthing associated with it lacks meaning.

    Now, if between a couple there is commitment, mutual respect and love, the gender should play no role at all in determining whether or not they could marry. The laws of the land should only formalize such a relationship, and nothing else.

    Because, after all, that’s what legal marriage is all about, a formality, which SHOULD ONLY be the recognition by the society of the will of two adults wishing to share their love and commitment. It has nothing to do with sex “per se”.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:23 pm | Reply
  29. The Rev. Canon Richard T. Nolan

    My male partner and I will celebrate 55 years together next month! We were married legally in CT in June of 2009 (as reported then in the NYTimes). Both church and state are catching up to our realization at age 18 (as college freshmen) that same-sex love and commitment as well as opposite-sex love and commitment are of the Creator's design. Now 73 and living happily in an inclusive "continuing care retirement community," we are hopeful that while we are alive, the U.S. Supreme Court will embrace us and so many others at the federal level as deserving all of the rights and responsibilities of married citizens. The Rev. Canon Richard T. Nolan and Robert C. Pingpank, http://www.nolan-pingpank.com

    August 9, 2010 at 3:26 pm | Reply
  30. Jared

    First off, what everyone is missing is that there is no such thing as "gay marriage" or "traditional marriage"; there is only one category and that is marriage. Once people make this realization and stop trying to separate the two, they will be able to realize how the constitution protects marriage for everyone and how the only conclusion that can be reached on this topic, is that bans on marriage for same-sex couples is unconstitutional because it attempts to create a secondary category and class of citizens, which is illegal.

    The government has no interest in defining marriage in a narrow application as those who are trying to create "gay marriage" and "traditional marriage, as Judge Walker stated, the right to marry is a fundamental right protected by the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment, and the government has no interest in defining marriage between a man and a woman. The US Supreme Court has ruled at least 14 times that marriage is the most fundamental of rights that Americans enjoy the freedom too, this includes everyone.

    This struggle for equality is no different than the struggle that African Americans faced until segregation was struck down and the Civil Rights movement of the 60's. The issue at hand is about equality and the rights guaranteed to same-sex couples that all other couples are afforded. There is no superior or inferior class, there is all of us on the same playing field; this struggle is about making sure that everyone's rights are both upheld and protected, which is what Judge Walker has ensured.

    I am confident that the 9th Circuit Court of appeals will also recognize this, and if the U.S. Supreme Court chooses to taken on the case, I believe they will do the same. It is also my hope that they will take the opportunity to apply this decision on a federal level so that all citizens in the U.S. are afforded the rights that are guaranteed to us by the U.S. Constitution; the people of the US shouldn't have to wait for each state to unlawfully try to ban their access and right to marry, wait for a lengthy trial process and endure the costs associated with the process, when it is shown to be unconstitutional.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:26 pm | Reply
  31. gerald z

    To those with, "...concerns about parenting," as a high school teacher I've seen plenty of heterosexual couples screw parenting up...so don't give me that excuse.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:27 pm | Reply
  32. Fred

    The problem I have with gay marriage is that even straight people will be subjected to hours of horrible wedding video. It's bad enough for straight weddings but when gay people are in charge of the music and fashion...can you say 8 hours of nausia?

    August 9, 2010 at 3:28 pm | Reply
  33. Ace

    The problem with letting the gays get married, is that the residual fallout impacts the rights of others. Children would be raised in non-traditional homes. This will impact their lives.

    I saw the gays doing their pride parades and there is no modesty. I see blatant sexual displays that should be private between the people involved, not dragged down main street.

    If this is what the gay are as a people, I do not feel they are suited to be parents. They especially should not be raising other children as foster parents.

    Marriage is a step towards legitimizing their rights in a moral society. When the gays learn to recognize public morality, they may change my opinion on their rights.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:30 pm | Reply
  34. Winston Court

    The first woman, Eve, was given to the first man, Adam, by God, Genesis 2:18-25. This was long before courts and governments of man. It is self-evident that this institution was designed for heterosexuals. Now enter government seeking to usurp the powers and rights of God and replace him with the institutions of man. The courts and government simply have no right in defining marriage. If government wants to give special recognition and or privileges, benefits, etc. to married couples, I suppose that would be acceptable. However, the way it is now is simply unacceptable and the courts need to acknowledge such and disentangle themselves away from the freedoms of religion; Their, government and courts, actions are simply unconstitutional in scope, intent and goals.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:31 pm | Reply
  35. Keira

    Gay rights are human rights.Everyone has (or should have) the right to marry who they love without government or societal interference. Marriage doesn't need to be protected from gay people. Gays pose no threat to anyone's relationship. Those who say so are only reacting out of fear – without a rational basis. The sheer hypocrisy about 'protecting marriage' when many heterosexual people (Congress included) make a mockery out of it on a daily basis needs to it. It's OK to have an opinion either way about it, but at least let's be honest about it. I don't want ANY govt telling me who I can/can't marry or deny me the same rights heterosexual couples get. As for kids, they'll be alright. All they need is love, guidance and acceptance. Both gay and straight parents can provide that.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:33 pm | Reply
  36. Harvey

    The argument in favor of same sex marriage in this blog entry is, basically: 'everyone else is doing it so we should too.'

    Does that make sense to you?

    This is a social issue confronting a society that is basically democratic in nature and in tradition and what Argentina and Mexico , among others, are doing is hardly relevant.

    The comments make much more sense than the blog article - especially Chuck Anziulewicz's comment which takes the argument and brakes it down into logical subtopics.

    The bottom line is, this is another place where the Federal Government has taken away Constitutionally mandated states rights; however it happened so long ago and is so entrenched in Federal law that the fact that marriage should be decided by the community or by the state is now moot. So let's ignore that!

    Personally, I think that any two adults should be allowed to wed, without regard to their race, gender, religious or political beliefs and I believe this will soon be the accepted norm in the U.S. The Federal Government certainly wants to maintain it's investment in the business of controlling marriage through tax law, Social Security and etc. and there is no legal basis for rejecting same-sex marriage.

    Some marriages will be "blessed" by both the state and by various religious entities and others will be purely civil marriages - other's will be considered common law marriages authorized by neither church or state but, in the end, regulated by the state. That's the way it is now - the only difference is that once this legal challange has been resolved, some of those marriages will be male-male and some female-female.

    The only opponents to same sex marriage are those who oppose it based on their religious convictions - they will continue to oppose it until the end of time and will continue to issue legal challanges but they will be (and should be) quickly struck down.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:34 pm | Reply
  37. aatami

    If two people want to get married then they should be allowed. I call BS on these idiots who state that they know what marriage is supposed to be. They are the first ones to cheat. Case in point: Newt Gingrich cheating on his second wife while he throws stones at Clinton for the Lewinsky affair. Republicans, a bunch of no good hypocrites.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:35 pm | Reply
  38. RHOD


    August 9, 2010 at 3:36 pm | Reply
  39. Gerrie Warner

    It should be any humans birth right to marry another consenting human.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:36 pm | Reply
  40. william kcas

    Marriage is a bond and commitment between two persons, in the eye of the law/state all should be treated equal, if the church does not agree.. well that is ok, , then same sex couples can not have a religious ceremony...that is the right of the church, but in the eye of the law are the same with all benefits a married couple is entitled to.

    There can be no discrimination in the eyes of the law..

    August 9, 2010 at 3:38 pm | Reply
  41. Rick

    There is a creator who designed things decently and in order. That is not religion; it is reality, otherwise, we would not have a universe constructed and functioning with such perfect coordination.
    Homosexuality is just another of the perversions by which people deviate from good order, much the same as bribery, murder or substance abuse. Homosexuality is unnatural and not in keeping with the harmony with which the opposite sexes complement each other. Further to this position, legislation for gay rights is a real crime against humanity.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:39 pm | Reply
  42. Katan

    Why are we still so afraid of difference? I'm an ordained minister and my reading of the Bible tells me that the Creator loves creation. One way we justify superiority is by viewing others as inferior.

    Marriage is a contract; it's a legal instrument, therefore the state absolutely is involved. People do not have to be married in churches. Couples sometimes come to me asking for a wedding that doesn't mention God. I explain that they can go to a justice of the peace or notary in that case. If someone chooses to be married in a church, it can't be just for the hoopla and pretty pictures.

    My church (the United Church of Christ) and I offer prayer and blessing for the couple who join their lives in the presence of their families, friends, and God – period. The sex(es) of the persons who wish to make that commitment shouldn't matter and thankfully, in my denomination, it doesn't.

    Not every pastor or congregation in the UCC feels the same way. Not many states will issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. There are commitment ceremonies, of course, but hey are not the same emotionally or legally.

    In the process of dispelling fear, which is the root of prejudice, it's important that dialogue continue and that respect be shown on all sides.

    Marriage is a civil right and eventually, all Americans will have that right.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:39 pm | Reply
  43. tamara

    why should it matter to me or anyone else if two people that love eachother would like to commit to eachother in a legal union..I do not undertand why anyone would be against it....by not allowing gay people to marry will not stop them from being together so for people that oppose, what is their point? And why is it anyones business?

    August 9, 2010 at 3:40 pm | Reply
  44. Rui

    I am Gay, and although I agree with a view posts, that some take advantage of the Gay Rights to gain citizenship benefits, there is a majority voice that is simply looking for the equal rights as promised in the US Constitution. The same Constitution that separates Church from state.

    I am sure all the religions have a right to voice their feelings, but their is one that really bothers me. The Mormon Church has been the most voiced recently, they are fighting to stop Gay Rights using very unfair tactics and worst off, speaking of sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman, yet they are the ones who will marry more than one woman, claim many wives, and then to boot disgrace themselves by claiming children as wives too.

    If this is about religion and GOD, then so be it. But don't smudge the truth about Marriage to suit your own means.

    After all, the Catholic religion was built as a result of a meeting of religious leaders who sat and chose what would be included in the bible and taught, versus human kind knowing the real truth. The church seems to have been making their own rules for centuries.

    I am an American citizen living in the Philippines, because of the Gay Equality. Immigration reform is much needed, and hopefully this year, Obama will pass reform that includes binational families. So me and my significant other can come home.

    Its truly sad, that here in a strict Catholic nation, homosexuality is accepted despite being illegal to get married, Gay men and women walk along side everyone, and no one cares.

    Its time religion stopped trying to get more, and realize GOD loves everyone, no matter the color of your skin, the size of your wallet, or the size of your congregation.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:42 pm | Reply
  45. saber

    in the near future brother will want to marry his brother or sister will marry her brother or maybe his mother or his doughter soon some one will think of asking. hey people weakup and be normal the coming genaration will only see the previos one and juge thing's.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:43 pm | Reply
  46. Amber

    Whether you "approve" of it or not is irrelevant. Do you approve of divorce? The Bible doesn't, but it's legal. Do you approve of premarital sex? Most people don't care anymore, but it was a grievous sin for hundreds of years.

    We disagree on all kinds of moral issues, but we rarely exclude people from important forms of civic life because we disagree with them. Adulterers can marry and remarry all they want. Polygamists can join the army, along with some convicted criminals. But gays are excluded an incredibly important rite of passage in American culture because others think their private love lives are "immoral?" It doesn't make sense.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:43 pm | Reply
  47. Leslie

    The article and the CNN "poll" ask the wrong question: "Are you in favor of gay marriage or are you against it."

    Elsewhere in the press, on the internet, and in the courts the question has matured into a public debate about: "Does the right to marry include same-sex couples?"

    CNN seems stuck in vernacular of years past. US States, countries around the world and courts are examining the second question now.

    When laws and societies reflect a change today, they extend the right to marry. There is no "gay marriage" separate and apart from "straight marriage." People continue to get "married" as they have for centuries.

    When you change the question, you may get a more reasoned and reliable response from your readers. The responses are not going to tell you much about what marriage means to ALL individuals and couples around the world.

    Try: "What does marriage mean to you?" People are mature enough now to respond to that question in a sincere way.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:44 pm | Reply
  48. Kymberlie

    I think as soon as you attach laws to the title of marriage it no longer becomes a religious matter it becomes a legal one and since same sex couples can have children and be just as good parents as single parents or heterosexual couples I 100% believe in same sex marriage.

    Homosexuality has been around as far back as the Romans yet it seems to continually go on a rollercoaster of how much it bothers people, is it a civil rights issue? Damn right it is.

    Now I'm not saying let homosexuals marry in churches that disagree with their practice, that would just be absurd but its almost as absurd to think that on the happiest day of their lives they would want to be blessed by someone who doesn't believe in their love.

    I truly could rant about his for days, weeks, months and I will for however long it takes for the world to wake up and realize we argue about far too much why can't we just be a little more understanding and realize that everyone should be equal under law.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:44 pm | Reply
  49. Carrie

    Same-sex marriage and homosexuality is wrong. Because the God of the BIBLE says it's wrong, then it is WRONG. Case closed.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:46 pm | Reply
  50. MediciSpikes

    Call it anything but marriage and I haven't a problem. Call it marriage and I'm uber-against it.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:46 pm | Reply
  51. J. Holloway

    Many in the US, for some reason, believe that the US Government is the defender of Christian values. These same people want less government and believe that talk radio hosts represent common sense.
    Just as the problems in Iran and Afghanistan relates back to education, ignorance and religious teaching – so lie the problems in the US.
    Religions are intended to be self perpetuating and ever expanding – gay marriage does not line up with that doctrine.
    But the US is suppose to be a secular government – yet have 'In God we trust' on the currency. Rather a confused lot from my point of view.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:47 pm | Reply
  52. Matt Lovatt

    My husband and I have been married now for a year and a half. We had the ceremony in Toronto. Me being a US citizen and him being a UK citizen, we had the difficult choice of who would move where. He wanted to come to the US with me, as I had a good paying career, home , family...etc. However, because the US has it's ways based on a little book written eons ago, gay marriage is not recognized by INS. I left the USA 4 months ago, and never looked back. I figure if the USA is giving me the finger, I shall return it. The UK was fast on approving my visa (3.5 days), I have medical insurance, and the peace of mind the government here is accepting of gays. You know what ? The UK hasn't crumbled, Canada hasn't crumbled and the few US states that allow gay couples to be recognized haven't fallen off the map.

    If you want to separate church and state....then do it already, and legalize same sex marriage on a federal level. If you don't want to separate church and state, then it's ok to say "Merry Christmas". Pick one.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:48 pm | Reply
  53. edmundo santoyo

    This is so absurd!
    To abuse and judge gay people is call harrasment . God is a Theory created by man-kind whose beliefs is just an idea they find very comfortable. So Stop using this excuse and realised no one has the right to lower other cultures way of thinking as we are all equal.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:49 pm | Reply
  54. Gene J.

    A single, hand-picked, judge should interpret the law, not be used to create law by abusing his power. This court room is a farce and a slap in the face to the constitution. Where were all of the pro-gay marriage people of California when this issue was taken to a vote last year? They weren't voting, or the law wouldn't have passed by a majority. The pro-homosexual agenda lost there, so now they've found themselves a single judge to rule against a decision of the population. A judge who obviously does not pay attention to the facts or the constitution.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:52 pm | Reply

    Two same sex Adults can live their lives as they so desire either by living together or otherwise...Personally,i don't care what happened behind closed door...But to use state instruments to legalize same sex marriage and right to child adoption is an attempt to undermine God.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:52 pm | Reply
  56. James

    In all of history across all cultures, marriage is one of the most universaly understood and well-defined institutions. There is absolutely no doubt that the definition is 'man and woman'.

    This is not a matter of prejudice, it's a matter of fact. Calling 2 gay people married is like re-defining the word 'red' to include all things 'blue' as well. It's just irrational.

    If we want to allow gay people to marry, we'll have to create another institution called 'gay marriage' – which is a new form of marriage.

    In addition – if we do enable gay people to become married – we MUST allow polygamous and polyamorous people to become wed as well. Every argument used to support gay marriage can be equally applied to polygamous marriage.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:54 pm | Reply
  57. Tim

    Speaking from the heart on this issue – The fact the two people are committed to each other and bound together through their love for each other and decide to marry – it is a beautiful thing. At one point does sexuality enter into it. Love does not discriminate. So why do people ?

    The USA has a chance to be a beacon on light for the entire world, be a leader for justice for all. Do the right and the fair thing.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:56 pm | Reply
  58. James

    Oh – and why does America – a 'leading nation' always have such narrow scope of arguments. In America it's always the left opinion vs. the right.

    In Canada – 'marriage' – is not even legally recognized – only civil unions. Since the majority of Americans are ok with gay civil unions – as is in Canada – it is commonly accepted that 'gay marriage' is legal in Canada. Actually – only civil unions are – it's up to Churches and other cultural institutions to define marriage.

    Point being – the argument is made mute by a rational set of laws.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:56 pm | Reply
  59. Charlie Stone

    While being gay will alway be with us as a society even in the church, it is still a behavioural problem that bothers on sexual depravity.

    Just like smoking, drug addiction...and all other bad habits, society should always engage homosexuals to help them overcome their behavoiural challenge.

    Some argue folks are born or wired up as gays....no doubt about this...some career criminals are also born and wired up this way...why do we try to change their behaviour thru the legal system then?

    Homosexuality is what it is...an aberation of human functionality.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:57 pm | Reply
  60. Ang

    Please, just check out the definition of the word MARRIAGE. That should explain it all. It's a civil union!!!! If this goes on......pretty soon we will be able to "marry" ANYTHING. Ang. Lisbon

    August 9, 2010 at 3:57 pm | Reply
  61. Tony Morrell

    Homosexuality is a perversion of natural and divine law. For those who care to know God's view, human morphology would be your first clue.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:58 pm | Reply
  62. Jenny

    I am 100% for gay marriage.

    You could argue that originally marriage was a religious institution and since there's evidence to suggest that homosexuality is disliked by God/Jesus whoever gays shouldnt be allowed to marry.

    However, thinking logically it is quite clear that the meaning of marriage has altered somewhat, its more about showing someone else total commitment rather than just some religious ceremony with the ultimate goal being producing children.

    I come from a Irish Catholic family where religious views were accepted unquestioningly, there were no reasons, no logic. It was just something that existed, blinkers over the eyes stopping you thinking for yourself. Keeping you ignorant.

    I cannot understand why anyone would ever want to deny anyone else the right to marry, sexuality is Irrelevant . If religious people actually believe that god made man, that we're in his image, that we were created for a reason then why can they not just accept that god created gays? If for a little diversity if nothing else.

    Recently two women have know have married their girlfriends and i wish them all the best. Have have committed themselves to each other, they'll share their lives. Its really rather beautiful and i think you'd have to be a hateful person to deny anyone happiness.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:59 pm | Reply
  63. James

    There is an effort put up by the media to position the 'anti gay marriage' people as 'religiously intolerant'.

    I am opposed to the re-definition of marriage purely for rational and social reasons.

    However – there's no reason we cannot create a separate form of marriage called 'gay marriage' and legalize that.

    August 9, 2010 at 3:59 pm | Reply
  64. Mike

    I can keep it simple....

    Why should people have different rights because of their choice.
    You can only have marriage if you choose what others think is right?

    I thought humans are free?

    But maybe it's just something i hope.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:03 pm | Reply
  65. Tiffany

    I see so many parallels between the LGBT rights issues and issues such as racism and sexism. Women had to fight to get equal status under the law, as did Native Americans, African Americans, and there have also been lesser known conflicts such as the rights of "white" immigrants like the Irish and also Jewish people. We as Americans are very proud that we made the right decisions in the past to grant these people the equal status and freedom they deserved and venerate those who fought for those rights (like Martin Luther King, Jr.) and yet we are still fighting for true equality today. It makes me ashamed that America, which was founded upon the principle of freedom, is still fighting over similar equality issues today. Separate will never mean equal. If you are religious, then you may of course choose not to marry if you are gay, and if you are a priest no one will force you to marry a gay couple, and if you are concerned for your children being 'exposed' to gay people then it is your right to place them in a private religious institution, but those freedoms will never give you the right to take away someone else's.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:04 pm | Reply
  66. Obx

    How cares??, everyone haves the right to be miserable as all married people I know (as Myselft).

    August 9, 2010 at 4:05 pm | Reply
  67. Paulo

    Infertile people can get married. Murderers can get married. Child molesters can get married and have children. Why not gay people? But beyond all that, Judge Walker's 130-page ruling was VERY CLEAR on why Prop8 is an absurd thing. Everyone should read the ruling. It is clear enough.

    It is just sad that while the GLBT side welcomes any debate, the Prop8 side is derailing into stubbornness and radicalism. They cannot, do not want to and will not see things that are so simple (as Judge Walker explained point-by-point).

    There is no need to protect children from gay people. Children should be protected from BAD people. No matter what their sexual orientations are. Period.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:05 pm | Reply
  68. Ron

    I believe that homosexual people are God's creation just as are heterosexuals.

    I believe that homosexuals should have a legal process available
    to entitle them to the same legal rights as all other people who love each other. I don't care whether you call it "marriage" or not. One issue is legal the other is religious.


    August 9, 2010 at 4:05 pm | Reply
  69. steve

    gay marriage is evil! If the West does not purge itself of this evil, then it should await the fate that befell the people of sodom and gomorah soon!!!

    August 9, 2010 at 4:07 pm | Reply
  70. Obx

    WHO CARES?, Everyone haves the right to be MISERABLE as most of the married people, including myselft.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:07 pm | Reply
  71. nubby

    Homosexuality has been around for along as humans have existed. To dislike something natural is, logically, irrational.

    If people who oppose same sex marriage on religious grounds would actually look at themselves and examine their actions they would find that the only reason they wish to deny gays the right to marriage is out of sheer spite.

    Anyone who is anti-gay/ anti same sex marriage has to ask themselves why they care so much. It doesn't concernt them at all, isn't going to affect them in anyway. What is the motivation there? Its either pure pointless baseless hatred, hating just for something to hate OR a case of 'he who protests too much' meaning i'd wager quite afew of these hateful people are homosexuals who simply cannoy accept their sexuality owing to their religious shackles.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:08 pm | Reply
  72. James

    You can see by CNN's statements in the article that they are suspiciously and deceptively trying to define the 'anti gay marriage' camp as religious issue, when this is false.

    There are clear moral, social, historical, cultural and biological arguments for defining marriage as something between a man and a woman. It's not a matter of 'rights', it's a matter of definition.

    If we want to have gay people marry, we'll have to create a new form of marriage called 'gay marriage'.

    We'll also have to afford the right to polygamous and polyamorous groups.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:10 pm | Reply
  73. James Wardell

    Well that didn't take long.
    You can have a marriage of ideas, a marriage of farms. The word simply means a joining together of two things. It's only recently that it's been re-defined strictly as the joining together of a man and woman. And who thought up that one anyway?
    And as for the procreation thing (as to being the sole purpose of marriage), my sister and her husband chose not to have children. That does not negate their marriage or make them any less united under the law or your church.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:13 pm | Reply
  74. nubby

    @ Tony Morell

    "Homosexuality is a perversion of natural and divine law"

    Divine Law? And just what makes that law more valid than the laws i live my life by? i'm not gay by the way but i live my life by the rules as set out in 'The Chronicles of Narnia'. Thats a book just like another i could mention. I honestly believe the Snow Queen will punish people who are anti-gay.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:14 pm | Reply
  75. James

    Nubby: 'homosexuals have been around forever' 'to dislike something natural is irrational'.

    This is a very flawed argument.

    Murder, rape, war and incest have been around for just as long and are arguably natural occurrences of the human existence, yet we do not 'like them'.

    Finally – if homosexuality were genetic – it would have been wiped out within 2 generations as the genes would not be passed on.

    You'll have to go back to the drawing board.

    Instead of having complete biased opinions based on your emotions, you're going to have to think rationally even if you think you are being cold hearted. Otherwise you're just making stuff up.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:14 pm | Reply
  76. Steve Hicks

    I am in favor of legalizing gay marriage in this country. The arguments against it are simply not credible and are completely prejudicial. It constantly amazes me that opponents of this topic are trying to protect the institution of marriage by keeping it between a man and a woman when there is over a 50% divorce rate in this country. How precious can marriage be with that statistic in play?
    Also, there is the small matter of separation of church and state which should trump the legality of the religious objections.
    I also see this whole process as a necessary step to the evolution of same sex marriages becoming legal. Opponents days are clearly numbered in this debate.
    Steve Hicks
    Seattle, Wa.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:14 pm | Reply
  77. Ruth

    I'm not a religious person, but a scientist. Homosexuality is a deviation from Nature, an illness no matter what the politically influenced DSM IV was forced to say. Every single scientific fact says so,and every other person's gut as well.
    Marriage, what represents, beyond any theological idea, is the representation of what has made Human Society progress on a stable ( imperfect, but very good) ground. Family is the core of it.

    I have nothing against a person that is ill , actually I have devoted my professional life to the Medical field, But when a society lets a biased, abnormal and deviated partial vision impose their views is time to say enough. Homosexuals are just doing it that.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:17 pm | Reply
  78. J Eaton Gonzalez

    I am against Gay marriage. I believe that being homosexual is something of a social/psychological disorder that can be treated and has been studied to show this. Not by "excorcist" like practices, but by doctors, medications and psychologists.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:19 pm | Reply
  79. Paulo

    Well... there was homosexual people way before marriage was invented. And homosexuality has been misunderstood all along (like marriage). That is why Religion fundamentalists and other gay-haters are everywhere (just like gay people). So it is only fair and natural that in the 21st century, when finally we are beginning to see homosexuality for what it is (a normal variation of human sexuality) the subject of "allowing gays do marry" is so easy to defend.

    Marriage is a commitment based on mutual love and respect. That's what it is. Funny it hasn't always been like that. But that's what is is today. Gay marriage is fine.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:22 pm | Reply
  80. Oleg

    Is it Court’s decision? What about western democracy?

    August 9, 2010 at 4:25 pm | Reply
  81. nubby

    @ James

    It is your rebuttal that is incorrect.

    I stated that homosexuality is natural, indeed it is and it is something that one has no control over. A homosexual cannot make themselves aroused by the other sex. However, murder, rape etc are acts of humans. They are choices that are made, decisions that people make and as a result are not 'natural' acts.

    Your assertion that homosexuality would of been wiped out in two generations is absurd and seemingly comes from your mistaken belief that i was stating that the VERY first man was homosexual when infact my intent was too merely try to express my view, which is backed up by science, that homosexuality is not a new 'feeling' but rather deeple ingrained in humanity. I refer you to other gay animals.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:27 pm | Reply
  82. Robin

    You will never be able to convince some heterosexuals that homosexuality is just another valid way of being. They are dug into the mud about it, whether by religion or their own way of reasoning.

    The same was true of racists who even now, see some diverse peoples as "less than."

    I am in favor of Gay Marriage. It will struggle through the same issues as Heterosexual Marriage (divorce, immigration etc) but will allow this part of our community equal rights and equal protection under the law.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:27 pm | Reply
  83. Saint Roy

    Please check out our RELIGIOUS WEBSITE http://www.divineamericanreligion.com It is in these Sacred Holy Books that you will find the truth apart from the ABRAHAMISM RELIGIONS OF..JUDAISM..CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM which continue to cause havaoc and conflicts..wars..genocide..rape and the Male Machoism of their theocracy. I am happily married..I have had 7 children and tring for a 8th child at the age of 55..I am fertile but my wife is 43 and we have to try vitro-infertilization because her age the eggs are the problem aswell as hormones in her body. LOVE MEANS TOGETHER AND NOT ANOTHER..WE HAVE NO QUARREL WITH EQUAL RIGHTS FOR GAY COUPLES BECAUSE IT DOES NOT INTERFER WITH OUR DAILY LIVES. LIFE GOES ON SO GET A LIFE!

    August 9, 2010 at 4:28 pm | Reply
  84. nasser

    100% against same sex marraiges.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:29 pm | Reply
  85. Tony

    I have no problem with gays being together and even getting married. But i have a problem with the trend in the society. First is the way most gay individuals dress and behave to distinguised themselves, this are ways of irresponsibility. Second involves popularity of being gay especially among women, my understanding is that being gay is natural like straight individuals, so why should women go to most lenghth to rediscover if they are lesbian or not. This is not a good sign because being human, we can be influence by our surroundings and we are prone to change and adapt. Lastly, if we legalised gay couples, very soon animals lover will come for thier own right as well, that means that because of freedom, human beings can also marry dogs and monkeys. Lets us be careful in the way we want to shape our society.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:29 pm | Reply
  86. Bill

    People are free to do what ever they want between themselves. Governments need not interfere or condone so long as it is two consenting adults. However, to marry them is another matter. I believe that marriage is reserved for a man and a woman. if others wish to "join" legally then create a secular document or agreement or whatever you wat to call it that contains language that deals with mutual property, etc... but don't call it marriage... it is not. It is of this world and it is not Christian, marriage is.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:31 pm | Reply
  87. Max

    You have only one life. Short as it is you should do whatever you like. Nobody wants to die sad or alone. Everyone should be happy. Can't you see that your hate makes human race evolve so hard? 50 years ago it was a mad man's dream to have an African American President. Now we have it. We evolved. Some countries accepted gay marriage, evolution has begun. You can't fight it so stop wasting your time hating and condemning gay marriage. Else your just selfish and upset 247, being an oppressor to evolution and a supporter to war and hatred. Have a nice life.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:31 pm | Reply
  88. Chris

    "If the government still considers "marriage" to be a religious designation rather than a legal one, it has no business making any laws concerning that institution. If, as confirmed by its actions, the government believes "marriage" to be a legal contract, it has no business denying that contract to any two people, no matter what their gender might be."

    The problem is that the government already "discrimates" by restricting marriage based on several requirements. As a society we (i.e. the "Government" who represents us) states that minors cannot get married or those who are too closely related – we still frown upon incest. there is still a limit on the number of spouses you are able to have and so on ....

    If the majority of society still holds that marriage should remain limited and exclude homosexual couples then it is perfectly reasonable for the Government who represents the people to reflect that. It's got nothing to do with rights.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:33 pm | Reply
  89. Susan

    I am for civil rights for all. For those that feel differently, please read the trial transcripts and then the trial decision to understand that if you stop one group from full civil participation in America due to your opinion, that you open the door to the same being done to you. We are all equal or we are not. Imagine if it were you being ostracized for a difference that others condemned and that is fundamentally you and you live as a good citizen and neighbor and church member in a welcoming church, an otherwise moral life, but those condemning outnumber you and even though years of peer reviewed research and a court trial on the arguments shows the condemnation and ostracize to be without legal merit in peer reviewed research, that they continue to grasp at anything to keep you out. Take a walk in the others shoes and look at it as a gay person would. What would this cause you to do if we applied the treat others as we want to be treated, that is the foundation of society? Take the challenge.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:34 pm | Reply
  90. mark almlie

    On a personal level I'm happy for the gay community. It is good to see couples happy. I wish them all the best.

    However, on a philosophic level, one minority group that did not start or help sustain the institution of marriage probably shouldn't have the power to change the definition of such a huge social institution for everyone else.

    It seems beyond question that marriage was started by heterosexuals for heterosexuals. Over the centuries, marriage has gained a good social reputation. So, now, understandably, a minority group would like to have the power and prestige of that name ("marriage") associated with their group. For starters, it might be kind to remember that you are new to the party that's been going on for years. You want to join a club that has boundaries. Every club has boundaries–even your group. One way to look at this is that your minority group is being intolerant of the definition and boundary that has already been established. Or perhaps envy would be a better word.

    But part of the meaning and prestige that comes from the word has been because it is defined already. I cannot cry inequality to the government because they don't give me (a single male) the tax break given to married couples. I cannot demand and cry inequality to be let into women's bathrooms because they are usually larger and more aesthetically pleasing than men's bathrooms. Or is being kept from entering women's bathrooms unequal to me as a man? Is it just intolerant bigotry of women to keep us from their more pretty bathrooms? Let's be reasonable.

    Why don't you start a new social institution and give the world something entirely new? Through the years you will have the opportunity to create meaning and prestige, and maybe in a 100 years "married" people will be crying to be part of your social institution because it will be the favored social status. But your community that started the new social institution should be allowed to either extend the borders of your institution or not.

    Additionally, your rallying cry of "equality for all" is that real? Do you wish to only be the first of many groups to redefine the meaning of marriage? I would think the polygamous community would be fast on your heels–they certainly have a more legitimate claim of historical definition with the word marriage. And if 'equality' and 'commitment' should be the new definition of marriage, then two 14 year olds should be allowed to marry? Do you really mean to imply this? Two first cousins?

    Death by a thousand qualifications actually can harm the meaning and prestige of a social institution. If you "get in" it might be nice to close the door behind you. But, again, what rational basis does your group have to redefine the meaning of something you did not start? A new, great computer company cannot claim the name "Apple" as it is already taken. Apple has the legitimate right to the name.

    I honestly hope that there can be more mutual understanding between our groups. Both sides have a long way to go to be more civil to one another. Should you win your legal battle, I will be happy for you. But philosophically I think your group is barking up the wrong tree.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:34 pm | Reply
  91. Frank

    If something unnatural such as beastiality is unacceptable and immoral (for the time being...) what make homosexuality acceptable? It's just as perverse and against the umblemished Image we are suppose (and ordered) to resemble.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:36 pm | Reply
  92. Tyler

    The religion-based argument against same-sex marriage is not only irrelevant in terms of the government's recognition of such an institution (separation of church and state), but it is completely hypocritical and unfounded.

    When I see all of these so-called "Christians" trying to put the 10 commandments into the law first (I would love to see capital punishment for working on Sundays, for example... ha!), then I will at least be able to have a conversation with them about it. The Holy Bible mentions same-sex relationships ONCE, and it is in Leviticus. How about trying to outlaw adultery, lying, jealousy, and not going to church illegal first? Oh, yeah... the political Christian right wouldn't be all for that because they would all be thrown in prison.

    Can the real Christians please come out and take your religion back? These zealous hypocrites are making you all look really bad.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:37 pm | Reply
  93. Craig

    Looking at it through my religious background, I have no doubts that homosexual marriage is immoral. However this is a country where the institutions of the state are independent from religion, and so an institution such as marriage which gives innumerable legal benefits to "married" couples must be open to anyone regardless of sexual orientation. We have no legal right to deny marriage in either practice or name to any pair of individuals.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:38 pm | Reply
  94. Abi

    So since when do monkeys get married??? Or should I say monkeys with more brains (AKA humans)??? I think marriage should be redefined. Whats up with marriage anyways? Why not just go to a judge and tell him that you want all these 1000+ benefits for this person of your eleccion and dats it?


    August 9, 2010 at 4:40 pm | Reply
  95. Mike

    Being from Europe, from a country where gay marriage has been legal for many years, I can tell you that once approved (and it will eventually be approved) it will stop being an issue very quickly.

    Why shouldn't two people that love each other and believe in the legal marriage establishment, not be able to legaly marry regardless of their gender?

    Gay marriages also bring additional revenue to lawyers, justice of the peace, divorce attorneys, and other governmental institutions that would otherwise be left out of this potential extra income.

    Eventually straight people won't care, gay people that want to marry will be happy, and it won't make any more headlines in the news..

    Is gay marriage 'ethical', or religiously approved? As far as I can tell, God does NOT make any distinction between straight or gay, black or white, rich or poor.. it is what each individual does to himself and to others, and the way in which one lives his or her life that ultimately matters.. Judge not and thou shall not be judged..

    August 9, 2010 at 4:41 pm | Reply
  96. Neal Kelley

    My own personal and religious beliefs is irrelavent. What is relavent here is that the consitution is upheld for ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS. It is what we have fought and died for. To deny people there rights under the spirit and law of the consitution is to say that the service men and women that have died to protect this country was in vaine....

    August 9, 2010 at 4:41 pm | Reply
  97. BeegBang

    I fail to see how same-sex love is the least bit threatening to me. Love between two people is not a matter of choice.
    Equivocating on the word "marriage" is foolish and time wasting.
    I think the Mormons (who dropped a bundle on this in California) and the right-wing Christians need to re-think the definition of love.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:41 pm | Reply
  98. Frank

    Well i dont think that Americans know what they are doing. To me gay should not be discussed openly politicized the way they do.I believe that any body that comes out to declare he is gay is SICK and should be treated as such. Such persons should be convinced to visit the Mental Hospital and see what they can do for him or her. Animals dont have government neither do they practice religion but most of them live a straight live. Pls American stop spreading these virus of yours that u call gay. The whole world looks up to u.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:41 pm | Reply
  99. Jacob Smith

    With the expanded definition of marriage as an institution that celebrates love and lifelong commitment, it is ridiculous to deny gay couples the right to marry. Stable, committed relationships are good for communities and for society as a whole, whether they be between people of the same or opposite sex. Religious tradition is the main deterrent in this process, and biblical injustices should not be considered a legitimate basis to deny these couples civil rights in the modern day.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:42 pm | Reply
  100. James

    If you were to read your Bible in it's cultural contest, you would see that the Bible is not against gay marriage. The Apostle Paul would have approved as would have Jesus.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:42 pm | Reply
  101. Barry

    In the most basic wedding ceremony, at the court house, there is nothing religious involved. As you move away from the court house and make the wedding ceremony your own, there can be religion. This is the point the churches should close their doors if they feel threatened by gay marriage. Otherwise, back off. It is a civil ceremony only. The Constitution gives everybody the right to access civil privileges. My hands are in the air saying "What don't you get?"

    August 9, 2010 at 4:43 pm | Reply
  102. datek

    I think everyone has the right to live their life as they feel is right for them. Why not make a distinctive difference between traditional marriage and same sex marriage? Couldn't it be called something different but have the same legal sense? What if we only had jazz music and suddenly I wanted to play a new music and to be fair I demand that we call it jazz as well. Suddenly cats like Fats Weller have to accept to beunder the same label of jazz as music by Robbie Williams for example. Because just to be fair everyone has to be under the same jazz umbrella. The English language is very adaptable and we can invent new words much easier than many other languages. We can certainly come up with a name that represents same sex marriage and that satisfies everyone. I think we forget that being the 21st century means using 21st century solutions to our problems. Get a brainstorming going across the world and we'll have a new name for same sex marriage.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:44 pm | Reply
  103. Barry H

    In the most basic wedding ceremony, at the court house, there is nothing religious involved. As you move away from the court house and make the wedding ceremony your own, there can be religion. This is the point the churches should close their doors if they feel threatened by gay marriage. Otherwise, back off. It is a civil ceremony only. The Constitution gives everybody the right to access civil privileges. My hands are in the air saying "What part of Constitutional Rights don't you understand?"

    August 9, 2010 at 4:44 pm | Reply
  104. Chris Biodrowski

    Different strokes for different folks. C.B.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:47 pm | Reply
  105. Neal Kelley

    @Frank Did you know that 2 percent of all mamals have same sex relationships.... That happens in NATURE... did you also know that 2 percent of the human population have same sex relationship... that happens in NATURE ALSO... it is all natural.. it is man that defines it as something else...

    August 9, 2010 at 4:47 pm | Reply
  106. Omer

    This is utter nonsense. What is this infatuation of gay people with marriage. Can't they just live together behind closed doors.

    It seems that marriage has become more of a statement for homosexuals rather than anything else, as they are trying to prove that they are here to stay. Fact is they have existed for generations and history has plenty of examples and that their existence has never been condoned by the general public, no matter how far one travels into the past.

    Isn't it enough for them that their existence is tolerated in the name of freedom. Can they not understand that the general public has a certain sanctity associated with marriage that they do not want trampled?

    August 9, 2010 at 4:50 pm | Reply
  107. Rev. Wallace Ryan

    Seeing as how homosexuality appears in many species besides humans demonstrates to me that it obviously is all part of God's plan.

    God created homosexuals and for anyone to deny them the right to marriage is spitting in the face of God. Any one who opposes gay marriage should be ashamed of themselves and the evil they allow to inhabit their minds. God does NOT hate homosexuals as some psychopaths suggest...God hates nothing. God is love and we all are worthy of it...ALL of us!

    August 9, 2010 at 4:51 pm | Reply
  108. Lisa

    "Marriage is an institution ordained by God thousands of years before the US Constitution." says Dave. If you know this for a fact and are a religious (christian/catholic) person, let your God dole out the punishment. You and your religious friends are not here to judge – isn't that what you are taught?

    August 9, 2010 at 4:51 pm | Reply
  109. Amy

    This is obviously an issue of basic equal rights. Whatever happened to the seperation of church and state anyway?

    Take the right-wing religious reasoning out of the argument against same sex marriage, and they've got nothing. The world is changing, and sticking to ancient principles just because they've been so thus far is ridiculous.

    And the child issue... no. That doesn't work either. Many straight people don't or can't have children, and many unmarried people have children together. Modern marriages don't happen for the sole purpose of procreation. There are also no 'accidental' pregnancies in an lgbt relationship. It's often quite difficult for an lgbt couple to have a child, and that fact ensures that when a child comes to be (through one of many optional methods), it has been longed for and will be well loved and cared for. Studies have shown that these children also grow up to be more open and accepting of others' differences.

    Remember when it was illegal for slaves to marry? Or mixed races? This is just the next step in a long history of 'updating' the current discriminatory laws as times change. This country really needs to learn to embrace that change with the rest of the world and accept people for who they are. Marriage is all about love and commitment anyway. Why put boundaries on that?

    Yay for same-sex marriage!

    August 9, 2010 at 4:53 pm | Reply
  110. mary-margaret burkholder

    ADDENDUM: I am in NC, now--I think it is necessary to legalize same sex marriage so that partners can have the same benefits as partners from Hetero marriages!!! That is importantso that families cannot exclude same-sex partners from hospitals and from death benefits!!!! I am straight, but have many upstanding GAY friends who are wonderful peoplewho have higher morals than Hetero friends!!!(I was also raised Catholic ,but cannot agree to that belief of the Church!!!

    August 9, 2010 at 4:57 pm | Reply
  111. Rick Reynolds

    Before you voice your opinion on the judges ruling, read the ruling. It's 136 pages and digests all the evidence and testimony presented during the trial. The findings of face and the detailed reasoning is most impressive no matter your views on marriage. I'm not sure this system will allow the link to show – https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/files/09cv2292-ORDER.pdf

    You can simply google Judge Vaughn Walker and read the ruling right off the site for his court. It is really a quite remarkable document that will have its place in the history of Civil Rights in America.

    August 9, 2010 at 4:59 pm | Reply
  112. dandan

    I have no problem with homosexuals or lesbians or there desires to live together happily for as long as they live. Just lets be real and dont call it marriage!
    Marriage is the union of a man and a woman, has been for a few thousand years... If gays are soooooooo interested in having a marriage like system, why not invent one with the same benefits and make up a namne for it?
    I think that gays are simply trying to "stick it" to non gays!
    If I were to use gay perspective on this issue then I could probably take anything from ANY culture I like and make it my own because I want to! Lets take Hannukaf from the Jews, Christmas from the Christians and Ramadan from the Muslims and claim all 3 festivities are property of my new religion: Meeeeeism!
    Doesnt seem logical does it, kinda of reminds you of how illogical gay "marriage"is!

    August 9, 2010 at 4:59 pm | Reply
  113. Will

    Human civilization is not static. If it was, we would all be living in caves right now (not closets). I do not accept the argument that "no other culture/civilization has ever accepted sam-sex marriage" as legitimate justification for suppressing the rights of homosexuals. The world has completely transformed in the last 200 years, new things are happening all the time. New ideas are being accepted.

    Gays are allowed to marry in Spain, there's your precedent right there.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:04 pm | Reply
  114. Martha Gardner

    Yea why not!!!!! Sexuality is personal & private!

    August 9, 2010 at 5:06 pm | Reply
  115. Christine

    Churches have the right to discriminate on this issue. The state shouldn't.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:07 pm | Reply
  116. David

    I love that the Religious Right appears to actually understand the use of the 14th Amendment in the argument for equal access to marriage; the suggestion to repeal the amendment demonstrates the lack of any cogent, logical reason under Federal Law why same-sex couples should be denied the right to marry.

    As a professor of Religious Studies, I find the use of religious rhetoric to support discrimination and hatred all too familiar and all too illogical. Biblical literalism should mean that the entire text is adhered to...sadly, with the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE, such an approach is no longer possible. Of course, changes in attitudes toward the treatment of women and dietary practices also challenge such literalism, leaving such persons to simply "pick and choose" which "laws" to follow, based on no sound, explicit rationale.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:07 pm | Reply
  117. Chris Cobb Jr.

    I am for gay marriage. I believe that no one has the right to tell anyone who they can and can't marry. People restrict others due to their religion, but we live in a time of legal behavior. I read some of the messages and the one saying that it's strictly religious is incorrect, does your marriage not go through the courts? You can't just say i'm married, you have to make it legal. So what gives anyone the right to say who can marry if you use the government that is trying to allow same sex marriage. I would say that is very ignorant of you, to say yes the government can allow heterosexual marriage because it benefits me. No, you cannot, that only makes you a hypocrite. Gay marriage isn't something everyone takes as a way of gaining benefits. I'm a virgin homosexual, and I say virgin because I know there is those who think that homosexuals are nothing but sexual addicts. The truth is we have sexual addicts just like heterosexuals. Homosexuals and heterosexuals are the same, only difference is one chooses opposite sex partners while the other chooses same sex. I believe it is our responsibility to make it equal for all. I am Christian, I believe in God, but a lot of us get a hold of the fact that the bible is always correct and you should go by it as though it's law. I don't believe that, for one reason God created us all and loves us all. I don't believe he would hate anyone for who they are just as long as they do right in the world. I believe this because after all God did not write the Bible man did, and man being naturally born evil may have put his say in the Bible. We should see this and allow gay marriage, because i do this in my mind, I say allow gay marriage and it feels right, no conscience, say no gay marriage and i hear my conscience say no that's wrong. I believe your conscience is God speaking to you. A lot of people say God can't speak to you.. .which is true he's not going to use words and talk to you like hey Bob whats up?... etc.. he's going to make you feel whether it's right or it's wrong. I believe it's time for America to grow up and allow equality for all and accept all for who they are. I would never take away someones rights on my own belief. It's not for me to judge. Why should anyone else judge who I can marry and love. It's wrong in every way. If you can't see the other persons point of view then you can't make a statement. I see both sides. I believe we should allow gay marriage because it's fair and equal and even if it goes against religion in your mind think of this, if it is a "sin" than you're not committing it so don't judge same sex couples. If they want to marry allow them to commit the sin. We are all supposed to learn from our mistakes so allow others to experience life, if you ever never do the world will never grow up. I ask america to please see the opposite sides point of view and not your own, only then can you make a fair decision, and always remember homosexuals have never tried to take away heterosexual rights, why take away homosexuals rights?

    August 9, 2010 at 5:07 pm | Reply
  118. fabio flores

    People should be free to pursue their happiness, anyway they chose to. This is about freedom, afte rall, isn´t it?

    Marriage is not only for procriation... Elderly people should be prohibited to marriage? come on...

    It is about time to trully separate churce from government (what should have happened a long time ago). If someone choose not to follow any church/religion in particular, should it be prohibited to the legal/state benefits of a marriage status? Of course not.

    Those who are religius people, I also back your right to your beliefs. But you should not force others to do so. If someone does not follow your same beliefs, and as long as that does not interfere with your rights, why do you care after all?? I never can understand that!

    August 9, 2010 at 5:08 pm | Reply
  119. Cindy Conforti

    Of course gay marriage should be legal anywhere that marriage itself is legal.
    If, in fact, marriage is considered a religious issue then it cannot be legal for gays, straights or anyone else. All legislated partnerships should be civil unions and no mention of marriage (a religious ceremony) should be made in the law. Religious issues shall not, by constitutional decree, be legislated.
    If a couple wishes to be joined in a religious ceremony, whether they be gay or straight, it would be the church's decision to perform the ceremony or not.
    Everyone, straight, gay or any permutation of such should be afforded the same rights. If it is a civil union then it should apply to EVERYONE. Anf if it's called a marriage then it likewise should apply to EVERYONE!

    August 9, 2010 at 5:12 pm | Reply
  120. Doug D

    Marriage, according to the principles in the constitution, CANNOT be anything but a legal relationship. It cannot be a religous function. As such, everyone is entitled under the constitution to equal protection under the law. State law doesn't matter on a constitutional issue. The constitution always must take precidence. If the so-called "conservative Justices" rule against the equal protection principle, we will have a big problem on our hands. That is called Legislating from the bench – exactly what the "Republicans" say we should not have.

    Religous organizations are still entitled to accept or reject people they do not feel are in alignment with their religous principles, but I am absolutely sure they have no business dictating what I am allowed to do. I read the decision of the judge on the issue and he paints a compelling arguement – not for gay marriage – but for equal protection under the law, and freedom of choice and religion. These are the principles I feel are important – not bashing a minority because we don't agree with them. I am still waiting for a reasonable discussion on how letting gays marry undermines man/woman marriage, the family, or children of gay families.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:13 pm | Reply
  121. Kara

    Gays should be able to get married. If we straight people can be miserable, so can they lol. Plus, its just a piece of paper, a contract, a legal binding contract showing two people are connected (hopefully) forever till death do they part. I don't see why the "church" is being pulled into this. Plus, didn't the founding fathers of America leave Europe to escape Religious Persecution? Seems like the old fad is back again.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:14 pm | Reply
  122. gtboyblue

    This so wrong and should not even be debatalbe. It's wrong, wrong wrong. I don't care how long this nonsence was arround, it's plain and simple WRONG. Two people of the same sex has no right in this society. And we wonder sometimes why things happen in the world today. Just food for though. I'm out..............................

    August 9, 2010 at 5:16 pm | Reply
  123. Opinionated

    This is a new step in American civil rights. It is a new way to define a legal contract between two people. Since it would be new...give the concept a new name; united instead of married. Half of the disagreement on this issue is because some people do not want their definition of marriage to change. Call it what it is... "Uniting" or "two people who will unite on day X"

    Something this simple could make civil unions legal in some states.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:17 pm | Reply
  124. Bernard

    If people say that a marriage is only a religious institution then I believe a man and a woman should be allowed to get married ONLY in a church. This would mean that there are no benefits from the government for married couples, if one spouse dies the other one has no legal rights, no special treatments with mortgages, etc. The term marriage is only used within the church and everybody who wants legal rights (man and woman, man and man, woman and woman) should be able to apply for a civil union at the government which will give full legal rights to the partner. This, I believe, would be the only fair way of proceeding as the conservatives can keep 'their' marriage and every union outside of the church would be called the same for all people (with same rights and duties). But I believe this wouldn't work either as some would still see the gates to hell open because two guys are kissing and on the other hand, unfortunately, there are many who do not accept anything less than getting married in a church as well (which I doubt would happen any time soon).

    August 9, 2010 at 5:17 pm | Reply
  125. jn360

    It's a civil rights issue, bottom line. There should be no mention of religion when discussing this matter, since our country was designed to keep religion out of legislation. There is no sense in imposing one religion's views and laws on the masses, when our country is so diverse, and has so many different religions, some of which are supportive to gays.

    I have yet to hear an intelligent argument against gay marriage. The only argument has to do with someone's personal religious views, therefore making it obsolete in a conversation that has to do with government. It doesn't matter if a group of people think it's immoral. I think discriminatory protests are immoral, but I'm not trying to take that right away from them. It makes no sense, and this issue makes clear that many people in our country need to take classes about our government and the constitution.

    I'm not worried about the legality of this issue, since historically, rights and freedoms always beat oppressive legislation. It's just disturbing that this conversation makes known the amount of bigoted people in our country. I support the rights and tolerance of all people. It's immoral and Un-American to pick and choose who gets particular rights.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:18 pm | Reply
  126. Justin

    I am gay, and I absolutely support gay marriage even though I might not get married myself... It's not a problem of right and wrong. In fact, it's a matter of equality and freedom. If straight people have the rights to marry, why cannot gay people? Their marriages will do no harm to the society but contribute to the stability and prosperity to the whole world.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:20 pm | Reply
  127. Fx4door

    A marrage is between a man and a woman! The people of the state that is the most screwed up in the nation got one thing right and now some bleeding heart libral sided with those that are not on the side of 90% OF THE NATION. PLEASE O'PLEASE let the high court get this one right!

    August 9, 2010 at 5:22 pm | Reply
  128. Adiani

    It is always interesting to see how people like to pick and choose their sins and which sinners to hate. They cling to certain laws in the old testament and ignore those that are inconvenient to them. In the new Testament, Jesus did not say a word about homosexuality, but he did talk out against divorce. "Let what God has joined together, let no man set asunder" They say that if gays get married, the world will end as we know it. But Leviticus also says it is an abomination to eat sea food. Now maybe the world is going to pot because we are eating shrimp? God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve! So who created Steve?
    I was not aware that there is anything in creation that God did NOT create. More and more scientific evidence points to the fact that gays are born gay and it is not a choice. So then why do people choose to ignore these findings? Because to study them would mean they would have to give up their hate. Dear Jesus, Please save me from your followers.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:23 pm | Reply
  129. Naila

    Okay, there is MANY things to say about gay rights. First of all, they do NOT deserve to have a right. They`re just sick confused ppl. I am NOT for gay rights. If it was not right to be gay, lesbian, or homo back then, what would make you think its right now????? ITS NOT! We need to ban it in all of the countries. Its sick and not right. Please eveyone, dont think its right. Dont think that just because its they`re life they can do whatever they want to. Thats not true. The world is turning into a very sick place. Have you not noticed all the bad things happening to the world ever since gay rights were legalized?? Like the earthquake in Haiti? Turkey?? This is a sign that if we keep confinuing on giving them rights, who knows, the world cold end in 2012. We need to change.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:25 pm | Reply
  130. Paul

    I am reading this discussion from Europe, I am married with two children. I do not understand why the word "God" keeps on coming back in this discussion. The Taliban do not want their daughters to emancipate because they claim that their "God" never wanted this. Some religious fanatics in this discussion do not want gays to marry for exactly the same reasons. I am with stupid that people still think like this in the free world.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:27 pm | Reply
  131. esho sunny

    I am sickened to death realising how sick and gaga your mentality in the west have gone what with your insulting our common sensibility.This does not have to be about religion nor does it need to be about culture or one hell of morality.its about the very basis of mankind,the fountain of our being and the very reason you and i are here.If your father or mum were homo-whatever where will you be or is it just about getting your COME and all others will be taking care of giving that you can have surrogate parent and sperm donors;so you care less further that kids now grow under same sex partners without profitting from the identities of both parents if there at all be?simply get your come and when you wake up another day and dream of owning yes owning a child you could even very soon clown or other a designer baby-yes and even your preference is and remains a matter of choice,hence this, is a matter of common sense and not about your capricious libido going riot..

    August 9, 2010 at 5:27 pm | Reply
  132. Naila

    *the world could end in 2012

    August 9, 2010 at 5:29 pm | Reply
  133. Osadolor O.

    We believe we live in a free world but fail to understand that the actions and decisions we take are influenced by other parameters that are beyound our control and that for every action and decision there is a consequence.

    Same sex marriage is not the next big thing to happen in our world, cos this practice is surely a visa to distruction. It is not about equal rights, or who pays or does not pay taxes, gay marriage is an abuse of humanity.

    The sad part of it is; when the judgement for this comes, not only gay people will recieve the purnishment but those who supported them also

    August 9, 2010 at 5:30 pm | Reply
  134. Randy

    Against. You want to be together, that's wonderful, but don't call it marriage. The only discrimination I've seen has been the way any disagreement with this cause results in the homophobia label being quickly brandished.

    Oh, and I really hate the way a wonderful word like "gay" has been usurped by this segment of the population, as if being homosexual is somehow synonymous with being happy. Same goes for the way something as naturally beautiful as a rainbow has suffered the same fate.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:33 pm | Reply
  135. Naila

    For crying out loud ppl. THIS IS NOT RIGHT! You must have some serious mental issues to think this is right. You dont see male lions humping eachother, because they know better than that. And you cant make up an excuse saying, There just animals, they dont know what they`re doing. Because that is not true. They DO know what they`re doing. If everyone thinks that gays and lesbians should get married and theres nothing wrong with that. Your the one thats wrong. Truth is, God created Adam and Eve. A MAN and a WOMAN. He wants a man and a woman getting married in church infront of him. Not a man and a man, or a woman and a woman. People think that just because they are for gay rights that everyone should be. Well, its not like that. We who do not support same sex marriage are not descriminators. Because they`re is nothing to descrimintate. Those are dirty filthy ppl that do not deserve to live.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:34 pm | Reply
  136. Lorena

    If they want to be together and they love each other very faithfully, I do not think they need to play with God's laws or with men's laws. I have met a lot of gays living together happily ever after and they do not need any paper, I guess many heterosexual couples DO NOT NEED any paper or law to be happy in love. I really think this is for money, it is the only reason why you need to be marry if you are gay. Adoption is a sin because everyone of us needs A FATHER AND A MOTHER, not of the same PHYSICAL SEX, it is unnatural look around there's A COW AND A BULL A ROOSTER AND A HEN A MALE DOG AND A FEMALE DOG for me this is sick.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:35 pm | Reply
  137. Gazza

    If the opponents of gay marriage list as their basis religious reasons then our government's separation of Church and State is meaningless. Heterosexual couples get tax breaks, rights over partners affairs and are legally recognized so they don't have to fight to fulfill their partner's wishes should tragedy strike. Typical of this lot; they only want to credit what benefits them. Their sole concern is their own agenda and they think nothing of anyone who isn't like them. They proclaim to be followers of Christ but they behave nothing like Him. Jesus is truly ashamed of these people. They don't get the fact Jesus hung out with those that needed Him and the one category of people He had no time for were the religious ones. Pity these modern day Pharisees can't take the hint.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:39 pm | Reply
  138. Ciaran

    The anti same-sex marriage argument is so weak but yet so unyielding they cannot see reason.

    Some of the main arguments include religion; the bible says same-sex marriage is bad! The bible actually makes very little reference to homosexuality. Granted the few references it does have are against it and it is referred to as an abomination but in those days "abomination" meant unclean. To touch the skin of a pig made you unclean, as did eating shellfish. The bible has a lot more to say about matters such as adultery but our society doesn't stigmatise people who commit that. Opposite-sex couple can remarry as many times as they like. Rush Limbaugh for example is very anti same-sex marriage but he recently got married for the fourth time! The sanctity of marriage indeed.
    Religion should also not be referenced for the pure and simple fact that not everyone is a Christian and the United States is a secular country. Why should atheists, moderate Christians, and people of other faiths be bound by what the Bible says?

    Another argument is the ancient definition of marriage should not be changed. Marriage never began as a union of love it was a property contract. A father would give his daughter to a family in exchange for negotiated assets, how romantic! Marriage has evolved over the centuries and it will continue to do so.

    Others claim the point of marriage is to procreate and since same-sex couples cannot do so they should be denied the right. What about women past the menopause and infertile people? By that same logic they should be denied the right as well. Same-sex couples can and do have children in their family. Denying those families the right of marriage excludes them from countless legal rights and protections. Denying the right of marriage to certain families damages those families, including the children.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:43 pm | Reply
  139. gkedpage

    Same sex couple should have the same rights as heterosexual couples. Just because their sexual orientation is different doesn't mean they are inferior to their heterosexual counterparts. Hundreds of thousands of same sex couples are living their life just as any other couple and raising kids. Prop 8 was nothing but religious propaganda which was supported by Right winged people and Fox news and I am glad that Judge Walker stood for the right.
    And everyone who is quoting bible and saying that God didn't want this to happen go drown yourself in a cup of tea!!

    August 9, 2010 at 5:43 pm | Reply
  140. Denise

    I was going to say i am opposed to gay marriage, but after reading some of the comments, I think i may change my mind.
    I am a Christian and am opposed to the gay lifestyle because it is a sin, but I am also opposed to drinking, smoking and sex before marriage, but these are all legally permitted. Homosexuality breaks the spiritual, moral law. As such, I do not approve of gay marriage, but I really cannot hold anyone to my christian beliefs unless they too are a christian.So with that, let them legalize gay marriage- it is still wrong and a sin- but christians cannot legislate morality, only teach it and live it in their personal lives.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:46 pm | Reply
  141. Agent Stan Smith

    "There is a creator who designed things decently and in order. That is not religion; it is reality, otherwise, we would not have a universe constructed and functioning with such perfect coordination."
    Next sentence:
    "Homosexuality is just another of the perversions by which people deviate from good order, much the same as bribery, murder or substance abuse"
    So which is it? Everything in the universe created by God -> Homosexuals are created by God. Homosexuals are not abominations before God.
    There bad things in the universe -> Not everything created by God is perfect->God is imperfect?

    August 9, 2010 at 5:48 pm | Reply
  142. Jeanette

    I am 100% in favour of same sex marriages, as well as adoption for homosexual couples. However, I do see the problem it poses from a theological standpoint. Being a religious institution and given the many times negative view on homosexuality within the judeo-christian tradition, I realise that many religious persons may feel uneasy with the idea of same-sex marriage. Being an atheist however, and with no personal interest in ever getting married, I think that we would be better off starting new traditions and focusing on equal legal rights instead of wasting energy on an irrational and intolerant religious system and tradition. I recommend that people get familiar with the books of Dawkins and Hitchens which expose religion for what it is. I am a student of human rights and have just taken a class in theology in which we tried to find views and ideas within the religious traditions that harmonise with human rights. I found the class ridiculous, how much can you really reinterpret a text without it becoming absurd? The bible and other so called holy scriptures have a negative view of homosexuality, period. Let's make religion and religious traditions and institutions be a thing of the past and create new traditions that are true expressions of equality and reason.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:49 pm | Reply
  143. Gene J.

    "Separation of church and state" is not in the constitution or the bill or rights! It was written in letters of the founding fathers of this country. Besides, if it had been written in there, it would have been to protect religion from oppressive government (even one "by the people"). The real crime here isn't homosexuality, it's the sheer number of Americans who have never taken the time to read, much less learn the documents that their own government has been built upon. This is just another case of a special interest group pandering for a handout from the government without wanting to put anything back into their country.

    Homosexuals don not care if they have the right to get married or not. Most of them wouldn't if given the choice. What the homosexual agenda wants is the government to support them on their quest to force homosexuality to be taught in the public school system as a way of life.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:49 pm | Reply
  144. Gabrielle

    The are like this so let them to be like this! That all.
    Morally speaking we do not have the right to prevent them from enjoying their right as a "free" humanbeen.
    What you will lose? What you will Get? toward their choise. Pease do not be selfish .
    I am "Normal peole" if you like term but I agree totaly because:
    1- At least I will make few more people be free and more happy in this planet.
    2- in other way I will protect them against the HIV or other illness and protect us also at the same time.
    3- As a human, naturaly, they have the "right " as like you and me so what is the deal.

    August 9, 2010 at 5:53 pm | Reply
  145. joe


    August 9, 2010 at 5:54 pm | Reply
  146. Mouldavi

    What's the next step? Adoption by same-sex couple? It really would be worring!

    August 9, 2010 at 5:55 pm | Reply
  147. bg

    The only people that approve of same sex marriage are gays and politicians afraid of losing their high paying jobs by offending voters. Same sex acts was one of the vices to cause the downfall of Sodom and Gommorrah. A sin is a sin!!!!!

    August 9, 2010 at 6:00 pm | Reply
  148. Dave

    "There is a creator who designed things decently and in order. That is not religion; it is reality, otherwise, we would not have a universe constructed and functioning with such perfect coordination.
    Homosexuality is just another of the perversions by which people deviate from good order, much the same as bribery, murder or substance abuse. Homosexuality is unnatural and not in keeping with the harmony with which the opposite sexes complement each other. Further to this position, legislation for gay rights is a real crime against humanity."

    Correct. Each of you must decide A) whether you believe in God B) whether God is the Creator and finally C) whether God created each part of your bodies for a specific functional purpose beyond merely giving you pleasure.

    If you agree with these three points, then the logical consequence is that you were ultimately created by God (not by other men or by the Law) for a purpose. The realities of biology then imply that male and female are complementary parts of a reproductive design. Not fulfilling that purpose (through menopause or whatever circumstance you choose to name) does not deny the reality of that biological imperative.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:00 pm | Reply
  149. Tony Saldana

    So we are talking about two consenting adults wanting to engage in a legal binding agreement recognized by the law and society. Hey why not. After all, us heterosexuals have not been to successful at marriage.
    Furthermore, gay couples should also have children as well. Lets face it, in general gay couples tend to be more educated and more financially stable. You have my vote.
    Good Luck.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:01 pm | Reply
  150. Cara Namaganda

    Put simply It is an abomination. The human race has been brought to its lowest ebb. Debate? Wha is there to debate about?
    Cara, Uganda

    August 9, 2010 at 6:02 pm | Reply
  151. L.Taylor

    "Everyone has to be like ME." Nope!
    I'm all for freedom... equality.
    I used to cower under the "God of fear"...
    no longer: not since I met the "God of LOVE".

    August 9, 2010 at 6:04 pm | Reply
  152. Nayana

    Marriage should remain a sacred union between a man and a woman, it is whats natural not what society dictates, however gays should be free to co-habit if they so desire and their relationship should remain in the privacy of their homes. Only a man and a woman can procreate to reproduce, so if gay unions is to be come the norm, then mankind will surely become extinct.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:09 pm | Reply
  153. Concerned4Fla

    What a dumb argument. Gay people pay taxes to the government, they should get the same rights from the government. Homosexuality exists in just about every species, especially when the populations reach a certain density. It's a natural thing for some people. If it really bothers you, the problem is you.

    Every argument against gay marriage was also made about inter-racial marriage as recently as the 1960's, when inter-racial marriage was illegal in every one of the southern states (go figure).

    If you're really into the religious government thing, move to Iran. During the long plane ride to Persia, consider that Jesus only ever got angry at the overly-righteous; you know, those pharisees that were trying to tell other people how to live. Don't be like the pharisees. You are not smart enough to tell others how to live. Don't be prideful and think that you are.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:10 pm | Reply
  154. Thor

    Why are those opposed to gay marriage so quiet about how up north their neighbor has had over 5yrs of gay marriage under its belt without the sky falling.

    All the fears and claims of those against these rights are unfounded and based solely on their religious beliefs. If the united states is a land where church is separated from state, then this issue should be a equal rights issue, not a religious one.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:10 pm | Reply
  155. Karen

    And what of transgendered individuals? They can live in a marriage, but their rights can be taken away and invalidated at any time as in Texas or Kansas. It's very reminiscent of the case of Mrs. Monks, whose marriage was declared invalid because of Arizona's (racial) mixed marriage laws. Someone asserted that she was part African American. In her appeal to the Fourth District Court, she pointed out the obvious: as someone of mixed race she couldn't legally marry anyone, black or white. The court's response was basically "Sucks to be you". Which is in effect what the current laws in most states say about transgendered people.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:11 pm | Reply
  156. gatalec

    I agree that the concept of marriage from a constitutional standpoint does not religion.

    On that basis why is marriage only limited to two people?

    Any discrimination on more?

    August 9, 2010 at 6:12 pm | Reply
  157. Felix

    Respect for a person's privacy and for everyone's right to family life means that it is unconscionable to disallow same-sex couples from being able to opt for marriage – yes, 'mariage' and not some third class status such as 'civil union' or 'partnership'. It would be totally unacceptable to say that Jewish people or black people marrying out of their 'race' should be given a separate sort of civil status for their unions. It's EXACTLY the same for gays and lesbians. It's time for the US Constitution's promise of equality to be made real for LGBT people as well.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:12 pm | Reply
  158. Foobsz

    So the Bible is sacred? Marriage is ordained by God?

    I say prove to me that there is a God.
    Prove to me that there is a difference between "religion" and a "cult".

    Let's look at the logic of this so called Bible, the creation of Man and all things that it says:

    Debunk 1: Genesis
    According to the bible, God created the world (as we know it) in Seven Days; Yet there is no mention of life from the Cenozoic nor the Mesozoic era, predating the environment described (and as-we-know-it) in the Old Testament. Genesis also fails to mention the terrestrial environment: the Universe as we know and observe it and/or particle law(s) and theory for that matter.

    Debunk 2: We are all inbreds
    God created two human beings in his own image: Adam and Eve.
    We are all descendants of Adam and Eve. God banished Adam and Eve from Paradise. They had children: Cain, Abel and Seth and other sons and daughters (33 sons and 23 daughters – what a horny couple they do make [be fruitful and multiply (Genesis 1:28)] ).
    No mention of Immaculate Conception for now.
    In order for man to procreate, he must mate with a female. So the third generation of man were the offspring of Adam and Eve’s children .
    Which amounts to social inbreeding and what we call incest.
    Adam and Eve’s children and grandchildren as a result suffer from a heightened risk to genetic anomalies and defects, illnesses and hereditary diseases as a direct result of the limited and diluted gene pool due to inter-family procreation (very fruitful indeed).

    Cursed is he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of his mother.
    – Deuteronomy 27:22
    FYI: Abraham slept with his daughter and had a child with her. Did God punish him?

    FYI: God apparently does it again – Noah and the Ark. Noah is ordered to select two sexes of every animal, while he destroys the Earth in one giant flood. So how cruel is that?
    Inbreeding man, inbreeding the general animal population? Diluting the gene pool for all carbon based lifeforms.

    Debunk 3: God cheats and side tracks
    So far so good. Up until now, the only offspring of man are the genetically defective children of Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve get grandchildren; a further dilution of the gene pool.
    Now here is the dirty little secret: the names of the grandchildren are revealed, but only ONE parent per child is mentioned… (example: Enos, the son of Seth; unknown mother – by all accounts his sister)

    Cain and Abel. Cain kills Abel (and he probably goes to Hell for it….). God apparently is talking to us again, so he is less angry. Cain is sentenced to walk the desert, stumbles upon… another group of people, and meets his wife!
    Wait, did God apparently cheat and did a little side track in creation?
    Where did these people come from? Where they banished from Paradise just at the same time as Adam and Eve?

    Adam and Eve’s other children and grandchildren wander about too and meet other groups of people, or have they come full circle? Procreating amongst themselves to dilute the gene pool even further?

    This repeats in infinite cycles until enough of a society is created to name them (Israelites, Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, Maya, Inca, Inuit/Eskimo, Normans and Vikings, etc….)
    Ow and apparently, God becomes angry again and stops talking to/with us.

    Debunk 4: God created us in his image…
    Somewhere along the lines, somebody asked “what does this god you describe look like” and the storyteller said “he looks like us. We were created in his image”. Cheap trick and answer if you have never met God.

    So God could be male/female, african/caucasian/asian or some sort of other ethnic group, gay/straight/bisexual/transgender.... etc...

    Debunk 5: Sex and arrogance
    God seems to be described predominantly male, caucasian (no mention of his sexual preference). He could also be a female or a hermaphrodite. Now there is Immaculate Conception, no better safe sex can be imagined. The Church seems to be so sure he is male and caucasian and heterosexual. How chauvinistic and arrogant of them.

    Debunk 6: Ethnicity
    Adam and Eve are described as Caucasian in the Book of Genesis. Never mind the inbreeding. Can you explain how one Caucasian male and one Caucasian female can make other Ethnic classes (for example Asian or African). It's biologically impossible, or could the genetic defects of inbreeding be the origin of Ethnic classes?

    Debunk 7: Truly Omnipotent
    If God created man and the world… who created the universe, galaxies, star systems and who or what created God in the first place and why and for what purpose?

    So I tell you... what is the true value of the Bible, and answer this carefully.... for it is the same question: "what is the value of chistianity and the institution of the Church"?

    What makes the bible and the church as more valuable than that which the Inca's, Mayans, Egyptians, Sumerians, Hindu, Greek and Roman Gods, Norwegian Gods (Thor, example), The Thorah, Quran and all other religious work?

    They are in fact story tellings of man. Nothing more. Really.

    So let's look at marriage again from a religious standpoint? Does it still stand?

    Okay, here's one for equality. Let's remove Marriage as a right of heterosexuals, that way equality is restored to even gay committed couples.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:14 pm | Reply
  159. William

    homossexualism is a public scandal, it's a disaster

    August 9, 2010 at 6:16 pm | Reply
  160. Lloyd

    Gay marriage is a direct affront to God our creator, it is an evil crime with in humanity, as they cannot reproduce, this would be the end of mankind, our beautiful earth would be lifeless as all other known Planets out there amongst the stars.
    history has shown us that evil cannot and will not prevail, God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.
    This period we are going through is the the start of the downfall of the western empire, as in great Empires of the past in their final days. History is just repeating it self. People need to read the manual of life which is the holy bible, that could defend us from all those evils.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:17 pm | Reply
  161. Fast Fred

    Same sex Marriage? Hell i'm against it. I was married and had the same
    sex for 10 years. Now I'm divorced and don't have the same sex.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:18 pm | Reply
  162. Elena

    The fact that this question is asked already shows how degraded we are as a nation. All of you gay marriage supporters and those who want to be married to gay people...how many of you were born without a mother????? none!!!!!!! so stop the junk!!!!!!!! You can live the way you want but stop promoting your degrading lifestyle! You make your own choices but remember that God will judge and already has....remember STD's???? Everyone who wants to live a good, meaningful life can only do so in the boundaries of a family made out of one man and one woman and God can change you, wash you through His Word and you will be made clean through Jesus Christ and enjoy the sexual relationship the way it was intended!

    August 9, 2010 at 6:19 pm | Reply
  163. Mary Holley

    Nature itself will tell you homosexuality is wrong.Look at the sex organs.
    two males do not fit together, two females do not fit together but a man and a women fit together. God gave freedom of choice.Jesus never made anyone follow his spiritual laws.He gave freedom of choice.Sin is still sin.
    The choices the government makes affects everyone.It is supposed to be
    by the people and for the people. If the majority do not want their taxes to
    support homosexuals, the government should honor that. the homosexuals need to understand that that is the choice they made and that they need to follow the rules like everyone else.An individual should be able to say where his tax dollars are spend and not made to support homosexuality. This is purely a play on politics.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:21 pm | Reply
  164. JC

    "Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" clearly stated in our declaration of independence, yet it is limited to a selected group. I feel that laws should not have any parameters to color, gender, sexuality, and all of the others. Laws should be written for all individuals to follow.

    Not being able to marry the man that I love because of our laws is ridiculous. Marriage is the union of 2 people who love each other. But yet all these religions are paying for all the campaigns to keep us from marrying. Maybe outside of the subject, but if you have influence in politics, you should pay for it. Religion and State are separate, if not, tax them. Religions that interfere in political issues should be taxed like everyone else.

    A stable union between 2 responsible adults willing to commit their lives to another person for the rest of their lives is the most amazing thing. I don't want to be civil partnered. That is horrible. I want to be able to walk in the streets and be proud to say, I married this man. He makes me happy and I do the same for him.

    I have nothing against religions. I was raised catholic and I respect it. But I am a child of god as well, I didn't choose this. Who in their right mind would choose to be taunted and ridiculed for the sake of being different. Like my father said when I told him I was gay, " You are who you are. You shouldn't be trying to change yourself for what people feel is correct. God made you this way for a reason."

    I love, feel, work, pay taxes, and do the same things that a straight person does, but why am I still not the same?

    August 9, 2010 at 6:22 pm | Reply
  165. Brian

    I think the word Marriage should mean a man and a woman. The words Civil Union should mean a gay couple but legally it should be the same.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:23 pm | Reply
  166. Silas Scarborough

    There hasn't been a single cure developed for a disease since polio was largely wiped-out in the sixties. Right about the same time, abortion took over the medical agenda and it's been a tool of harassment of medical people ever since. It's important to get your priorities clear and, in America, it doesn't appear to be medicine.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:25 pm | Reply
  167. georgy_it (san jose)

    it is ok by me as long as the taxpayer money dont go in assisting miscarriage.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:29 pm | Reply
  168. Wrighteous

    I think people should mind their own business and let gay, law-abiding citizens marry whomever they choose. The government, religious groups and others have no business dictating nor infringing upon the rights of others. If two consenting adults want to marry and make a committment to each other, then who are we to judge and prevent them from doing so?

    These religious groups who oppose gay marriage need to stay out of other people's bedrooms and lives. The gay community doesn't need them telling them what we can do with their bodies or their lives. If more time was spent spreading love instead of hate, the world would be a much better place!

    This is why organized religion SUCKS! Hate mongers in the name of God. Quite an oxymoron,,,don't you think????

    August 9, 2010 at 6:34 pm | Reply
  169. jimmygraham

    If homosexuals believe it's their right and everybody else should shut up about this right of theirs where does rights like this end? Animal
    lovers truely believe that dogs are like children,some sleep with dogs
    and dress dogs like kids.some love animals so much they'd be willing to marry their horse or cow.This is the reason Lev18 23 Don't
    sleep with animals it's perverted.So,how far should equal rights go?.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:35 pm | Reply
  170. Mr. Reason

    I can't believe that in a free country like the US there are still so many intolerant groups. I hear people say "tradition dictates so and so" or "it's always been between a man and a woman" and other people say "it was a voter-approved law". Number 1, as we evolve many traditions change and a tradition that violates human rights should not be allowed anymore. In the past it was tradition to own people as slaves and it was tradition to segregate people based on race and/or national origin (blacks, irish, italians, asians and latinos know this very well). NOW all these "traditions" are looked as part of the US bad history.

    As far as voting to allow or disallow a particular minority in this case gay people, the right to marry, sounds just sick. It just feels so archaic, so medieval and so unreasonable having people vote and decide for the lives of others.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:38 pm | Reply
  171. Chris

    A debate this shouldn't even be. What has made this a debate is religious views that should not even be a factor in this. Religion is not government and vice versa. People are free to have whichever religion they choose, one of the last great things this country gave us. But it also gave the people another thing...the right to choose how they live. Not how other people want them to live. The bickering of the religious reich in this country reminds me much of how certain other civilizations through time portrayed their ideals onto a large amount of people....with propaganda. Let's remember the ones who oppose this were also the ones who brought on such horrific things such as the Spanish Inquisition. Religion of any faith does not pertain to all, therefore anyone with a personal view needs to keep it at that. A majority of people in this country are Christian yes, but that doesn't account for everyone. Furthermore a majority of people in this country are so tired of hearing religion with politics that even a whisper of religion in any campaign trail could result in a massive loss of votes.

    In essence, if everyone learned to live with eachother and not against eachother, the peace we all want, and yes we all want our kids to grow up happily...will take place.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:41 pm | Reply
  172. Thomas Woodward

    I support the right for same-sex couples to be married in the same way as heterosexual couples. If you are a man, and you are against it, then don't marry a man. If you are a female, and you are against it then don't marry a woman. I also fully support any and all homosexuals in the military, and wish that we could become a nation that supports the true identity of it's heroes. For a country of originally formed of immigrants escaping persecution we sure are pretty off base today. This is just my opinion, and if you disagree, I support you're right to do that, because otherwise I would be a hypocrite.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:42 pm | Reply
  173. clone16

    Look i'm from the Netherlands where there have been gay rights for some time now, personally I really dont understand why people are trying to stop this whole idea of two people of the same sex creating a union together. I mean come on if it doesn't affect you personally then why bother, and who cares about the FREAKING bible, then let them go to hell if you believe it to be so, just stop defending that they can't get married because they have to listen to god, and because he told them so.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:42 pm | Reply
  174. FRANCUZ


    August 9, 2010 at 6:44 pm | Reply
  175. alkythumnwl

    We live in a society where those who espouse "Tolerance" are actually only tolerant of others who share their opinions. Everybody else's opinion is dismissed as "intolerant" or even "discriminatory" without further ado.

    Ask yourself– In a newspaper article or in a university classroom, what is the reaction to somebody who stands up for traditional marriage? Most likely they'll be mobbed for it. In extreme cases, showing support for traditional marriage might cost you your job or a good grade at university.

    Maintaining the opposite opinion, support for gay marriage, is perfectly acceptable in our society, and may be voiced at will by politicians, authors and students without any repercussions. That's why we only read and hear one side of the argument.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:45 pm | Reply
  176. Eric Collins

    The problem is religion. The world will be a better place once everyone realizes that it is a complete historical farse. I am constantly amazed at what "inteliigent" human being are capable of swallowing.......

    August 9, 2010 at 6:46 pm | Reply
  177. Timothy

    God is the Same Yesterday, Today and forever will he be the same. He judged sodomy back in Bible times by destroying Sodom and Gomorrah and because of His nature he will do it again. Just like Sodom and Gomorrah was given a long leash on which to play and have fun before it's sure destruction, so will it be in this time.

    Marriage God intended between a man and woman will always produce life and good things.

    Marriage Satan is invoking between same sexes will only produce death, hell and disaster for ones soul.

    Same sex marriage is a Sin!

    God has to judge sin it's His nature. Don't be caught on the other side of the fence when the hammer goes down, you'll wish you'd never been there!

    August 9, 2010 at 6:46 pm | Reply
  178. Tony

    In the middle east, where the level of tolerance is minimal, there is a need to safeguard the gay population by, first, removing discrimination laws and then by allowing or tolerating gay relationships. We are way from gay marriage, but we long to live in freedom.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:48 pm | Reply
  179. Steve in Chardon

    I've been waiting, ever-so-patiently, for the religionists in this country to tell me why the concept of same-sex marriage is a weapons-of-mass-destruction-type threat to my marriage-unless they're referring to the alleged threat to their self-anointed control over everyone and everything on the entire planet, including the aforementioned marital agreement. Over my many years, I've not lost a single friend, gay or lesbian, over this issue; yet I have lost more than a few "straighties" for the simple reason that I would not see "the light" of their revealed "truth."

    I am a citizen of these United Sates of America-and I do not kowtow to such religious zealotry....

    August 9, 2010 at 6:48 pm | Reply
  180. carole raphaelle davis

    Anyone who is fighting for legislation to remove equality for ANY people is a dangerous fanatic. These religius nuts who campaign against gay and lesbian couples are mean-spirited, backward, ignorant and stupid.
    Equality for all!

    August 9, 2010 at 6:49 pm | Reply
  181. Beniston John

    This thing is not new in our world, it is with us since humans came in this world so a thing which is wrong will be wrong forever and it cant be called right whether the followers of this have gain numbers or favor of others (those who are fighting for their so called rights). We should always criticize whatever is wrong.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:51 pm | Reply
  182. Douglas Porter

    I have no problem with gay marriages, let them have as many children as they can and it should resolved in time.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:52 pm | Reply
  183. Kistie3

    Why do people still have to be so hateful?
    Love they neighbor as thyself? Stop picking and choosing between rediculous statements in some book.
    Grow up

    August 9, 2010 at 6:54 pm | Reply
  184. Tefetiro




    August 9, 2010 at 6:54 pm | Reply
  185. kay

    There's nothing wrong with TWO HUMANS GETTING MARRIED. Religion does not come into this.Man created religion. God created humans. God never said marrying another HUMAN is wrong. Most of us are hypocrites.
    We tend to follow the majority or whats convenient for us. Common people, its marriage between humans..

    August 9, 2010 at 6:56 pm | Reply
  186. Adam

    As far as I'm concerned, currently living in a defacto (common law marriage) relationship myself, marriage is a matter between a church and it's members. I oppose gay marriage entirely, as I don't believe we should force OUR views onto someone ELSE church. I understand and appreciate most religions views of frowning on homosexuality and have no problem with it as everyone has the right to their own opinion, even if I dislike or disapprove of it.

    I believe that no government should ever enact legislation forcing gay marriage into churches when common law marriage is available practically everywhere and with far less pomp and circumstance. If you WANT pomp and that's your reason to get married, organise your 'wedding' how you please, just don't claim that there's a difference between defacto marriage / common law marriage and that of 'marriage' by the worlds churches.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:56 pm | Reply
  187. Rob Harrington

    I am so moving out of California.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:58 pm | Reply
  188. Gazza

    I read through the opponent's arguments and it's predominantly based on religion. It's a pity they don't understand they don't measure up to the standards they expect others to live up to. The contents of a majority of their rationale are gay men and lesbians are just sexual perverts. No more. It's so short-sighted to deny that your lover and best-friend, person you ache for when he or she isn't around and the one whom you trust with your whole heart can be someone of the same gender. I challenge these people to try and imagine being condemned for having your partner, shunned publicly, denied access to your partner in the event of medical crisis and should he or she pass on be denied having any say even though you know, have discussed and have legal documentation stating you have final authority to carry out any and all last wishes. (Funny how straight family that's been out of touch for years suddenly appear to steal the estate and all its assets both single and joint) Until you can honestly put yourself in that position you have no right to express your hatred under the guise that you're doing God's will. You're not. Trust me–He is very ashamed of you and the blight you put on His name.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:58 pm | Reply
  189. Annabel

    In Afghanistan, where our troops are fighting to liberate people from the Taliban, men and women are regularly maimed or executed for making unpopular decisions about marriage. Don't want to jump into arranged marriage? Honor Killing. Want to escape an abusive marriage? Honor Killing / Retaliation by mutilation. Relationships outside of marriage? Yep – death. And all in the name of Islam, one of many religions that ban gay marriage.

    And closer to home, it was pretty recently in history that homosexuality and mixed-race marriages were considered 'un-Christian.'

    The lesson? Religion and government getting involved in marriage is a bad idea. It would be much better if people learned how to mind their own business, and not get all bent out of shape that two people in love have found each other, regardless of their sex.

    August 9, 2010 at 6:59 pm | Reply
  190. Thomas Woodward

    There are fundamental problems with some of the arguments some of these posts are making. To use religion as a basis for an argument against new law is un-american, as we are to observe a separtion between church and state per the constitution.

    To say that nature indicates a problem with it is also just absurd. Aren't we nature? Or is nature defined in you're minds as the stuff that happens outside of human control? In that instance modern medicine, plumbing, and most contemporary food should be abolished.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:03 pm | Reply
  191. Mike

    From time immemorial we have always undersood what the term marriage means, a union between male and female with the real prospect of enriching future generations with offspring. If there are those in society who wish to enter into sterile relationships please do so, but do not pervert our meaning and understanding of the term marriage.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:11 pm | Reply
  192. R Thompson

    If gay men and women need acceptance or recognition for legal status, be it to have equal rights under the law in the same way that heterosexuals do, then I'm for it. But let's call it something else then, ok? Throughout history marriage was always a sanctity between a man and a woman that legitimized their union based on procreation. And no matter what, regardless of which side you support, lets not forget, equal rights under the law includes prosecution for infringement and harassment.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:11 pm | Reply
  193. Joe

    I think that homosexual marriage is pretty gay.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:15 pm | Reply
  194. Mark

    Those not in favor of gay marriage should not marry a same sex partner. It is as simple as that. Some people are not in favor of Christianity, but we are not going to try and prevent you from practicing your faith.

    People should be more concerned about their own lives instead of trying so desperately to prevent other people from living theirs.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:16 pm | Reply
  195. elaine

    as soon as you make something legal you are saying it's ok to do it. this is the way it was meant to be. Personally i don't believe this is what god intended. adam and eve in the garden of eden, not adam and adam.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:16 pm | Reply
  196. Tom

    who cares!!! Really, if gays want to marry why shouldn't they be as miserable as some of the straights are.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:17 pm | Reply
  197. Maria

    I do not agree with it.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:19 pm | Reply
  198. Mr. Verlin Richins

    If its ok for two dudes to be married why not one dude and two women? States should have never gotten into the business of marriage. Marriage is a religeous concept and it has nothing to do with government. I am a Native Californian, a Mormon, and not a republican. The Mormon church gave up plural marriage in order for Utah to be addmitted into the United States. Mormons accepted conventionality, altererd thier marriage doctrine and went along with public demands. If same sex marriage becomes legal, against the will of the majority, how do you deny poligamists legal marriages too?

    August 9, 2010 at 7:19 pm | Reply
  199. Skeptic

    Both tolerance and marriage as a fundamental right for all people are myths. Sadly, in practice tolerance is just political correctness and manifests in gross intolerance to any who hold politically incorrect views. Marriage is a fundamental right for all people? Really? In which US state are two 14-year-olds allowed to get married? In which state can a 15-year-old legally have sex with an 18-year-old, let alone get married? Or in which state can a person legally marry a biological sibling? It's simply a case of what is considered a politically correct limitation to this "fundamental right" and what isn't. In reality, neither conservative nor liberal US is any more tolerant than Saudi Arabia. What we tolerate may be different, but we're equally intolerant of those who disagree.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:23 pm | Reply
  200. pfiore8

    i don't have an opinion about whether people should or should not get married. it's up to them.

    i do have an opinion about the state somehow asserting it has an interest in who marries whom. and i say this: stay out of our bedrooms, doctors' offices, and wedding ceremonies.

    what the state ought to be regulating is pollution, wall street, banks, and corporations.

    gay people getting married, as far as i can tell, hasn't brought a world economy to its knees or been behind the BP oil leak.

    maybe its time to stop this silliness and trying to divert us from real problems. are we prepared if we get a Moscow summer, for instance? or is gay marriage really more important?

    wow. will we ever learn?

    August 9, 2010 at 7:24 pm | Reply
  201. Maria

    I don't think the argument is whether gay couples should be allowed to get married by the church...if that was the case, I think if a particular religion is against it, that particular church has the right to refuse marrying same sex couples...the bottom line is that people for same sex marriage are fighting to obtain the same rights a straight married couple has...things like visiting your spouse in a hospital intensive care unit or during restricted visiting hours in other parts of a medical facility, making medical decisions for your spouse if he or she becomes incapacitated and unable to express wishes for treatment, Making burial or other final arrangements, Inheriting a share of your spouse's estate, Filing joint income tax returns with the IRS and state taxing authorities, etc, etc. I really don't understand why is it that people are so against it. Whether you think being gay is morally wrong or not, you won't stop people from being gay by taking away these rights and ultimately these things have little to no effect on anyone else but the couple in question. If we don't allow same sex couple these rights based on the fact that it is morally wrong, then why do we not allow any punishment for people who commit adultery?

    August 9, 2010 at 7:25 pm | Reply
  202. Rozzie

    It's no one else's business who marries who! For those opposed,
    is it a jealously problem that maybe their church wouldn't understand their OWN 'coming-out-party?' Mind your own business, stay out of
    American bedrooms, don't have abortions if you don't want one,'but don't count on your church helping you out babysitting...also - please
    don't forget to send emails/letters/faxes to Cheney's daughter re:
    'her gay-ness,' and, don't forget Bristol Palin's baby-out-of-wedlock and
    her 'fame' running around the country collecting fees for speaking
    about her un-marriage-to-Levi-the-stud-bunny - so again, stop
    bellyaching, myob!

    August 9, 2010 at 7:26 pm | Reply
  203. Manfred

    I have nothing against it. Gay and lesbians have as much right to be unhappily and miserably married and the rest of us. Why should they be exempt just because they are not straight.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:30 pm | Reply
  204. Phil Kolb

    Chuck, you wrote the most straight forward argument on this issue. We gays are NOT changing anything for straight couples. Not one thing. There are many straight couples who do not have kids, by either inability to have children, or they wish to remain childless.

    When my partner passed away 18.5 years ago, and we had been together for 16.5 years. I had major problems with the 'loving family' as his one sister put it at the memorial service, but I was treated as dirt. I wish we had been able to marry, would have made things so much simpler. Instead it wound up in court, and thankfully the judge ruled in my favor.

    Your comment was straight forward, to the point, devoid of emotion one way or the other. I would almost guess you are a lawyer. Wish you were arguing this case before the Supreme Court when it gets there.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:30 pm | Reply
  205. Gail Duncan

    What is the big deal?Often, no one can help who they love. Plus the way the system is set up, a couple living together for years can be kicked out of Intensive care, their home, belongings...all because there is no legal document. We have more issue's pressing down heavy on us for to argue about same sex marriage.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:31 pm | Reply
  206. Ricardo

    Please tell me, can a man reproduce. Can a man, with a man bring forth a child. The answer is No No No. God made male and female and they became one flesh.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:32 pm | Reply
  207. Jared

    Having been watching this story and the feedback people are providing, I have seen several misunderstandings or misinterpretations:

    – There are no categories to marriage; there is no "traditional marriage" and there is no "gay marriage", it is "marriage" in and of itself.

    – That said, marriage is a fundamental right as the US Supreme Court has stated several times over, in their history. Since it is a fundamental right, it is applied to all. AKA – the right to marry.

    – Furthermore, there is no definition of marriage to include "just a man and woman" as it has been established the government has no vested interested in defining marriage, as it does not advance society (to narrowly define marriage), but also does not harm anyone at the same time to allow all persons to marry, regardless of the sex of the person they choose to marry.

    – Civil Unions, as an alternative to same-sex couples marrying, is unconstitutional as well, as it creates a separate and segregated class; it also creates a superiority and inferiority, however we are the constitution provides us to equals. It also defines marriage to exclude same-sex couples, again, this is unconstitutional because the government doesn't define nor have interest in defining marriage. The right to marry is a fundamental right to everyone, not to opposite-sex couples.

    – Religion continues to be a "reason" for some as to why to be hateful to others, however, we have separation of church and state and as Judge Walker pointed out, religious reasons are not legal reasons; nor are these arguments of morality.

    Furthermore, I have read the entire 136 page decision from Judge Walker who used both methods available for coming to his conclusions, and both without a doubt, could only result in his conclusions. The proponents of Prop 8 did not provide a shred of evidence on any of their implications or "promises to provide evidence" that they made at the beginning of the trial. In fact, their evidence not only showed that they were gaining support through deceptive and misguided information, but it also supported the case as to why Prop 8 is and will remain, unconstitutional.

    My advice to those who oppose equality for everyone, read the ruling. It clearly lays out the evidence and legal reasoning as to why Prop 8 is unconstitutional; it's not about religion and it's not about right or wrong; it's about our constitutional guarantees (the only thing that legally counts).

    August 9, 2010 at 7:34 pm | Reply
  208. Jared

    @Ricardo and others who use the reproductive aspect for reasons of discrimination and denial of fundamental and constitutional rights.

    – Marriage is not defined based on, nor have any expectation of, the ability to reproduce. Nor does the government have any interest in narrowly defining marriage to include such qualifications. There are opposite-sex couples who are getting married and have the inability to conceive a baby; whether this be because they were born infertile, have a birth defect that prevents them from conceiving, or whether they are elderly couples. Based on your arguments that same-sex couples cannot conceive (even though they can, using the same methods are a vast number of opposite sex couples do), then they too should not be allowed to marry.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:38 pm | Reply
  209. Mario D

    Same sex marriage is a critical step in normalizing a relationship which is fundamentally disordered. If we do take this step as a nation...then we should repeal any age limits on marriage and allow adults to marry children/teens as well. And let's not stop there! We should give the FLDS Mormons a nod on bigamy and leave them alone too! But wait, there's more! Really got something for a first-cousin or a sibling? Then you too should have the right to marriage! Where does it end??

    Yes, then we can also ask "where did it start"? That answer is given elsewhere in the posted comments regarding Christian views on marriage and creation. I am a Christian but didn't really wish to go over what others have done so good a job to post.

    For those who would dismiss my opinion as "homophobic" – I say simply I am God-phobic. I fear only He who can take away the life of my soul. I have had wonderful friendships and work colleagues who were homosexual, Mormon, had children without marriage, had marriage without children, and did all sorts of things I would never do in my life – but I would never say that I have a phobia against that which I do not agree to. My sins are many, and if I give even one second to worry about correcting the sin of my neighbor – I am a fool. I can only work on my own behavior and working out the defects.

    BTW, I am now living abroad – it is very clear the U.S. often leads the Western world in change in attitude. This influence is a double-edged sword. The kids here are getting fat on McDonalds and smoking Ami cigarettes like they are the best thing ever. The junk TV shows from America have foreign language voice-overs (or clone shows in original language and host like Big Brother of Fat Loser stuff) so we can convince the rest of the world that the crazy stuff the TV script writers dream up is real. Sadly my in-laws now consider the TV their primary source of truth!


    August 9, 2010 at 7:38 pm | Reply
  210. Larry Fowler

    Gay relationships are a sin as defined in the bible. However, there are a lot of other sins also and concentrating on one is a social issue. We should forgive sins but not support them. Gay relationships should be accepted as a sin and accepted as such by society. We lie all the time, even under oath but people accept that and go on with life. It should be the same with gay relationships. Th\e main point is that society as a whole or the government should not recognize it as a right or support marriages.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:38 pm | Reply
  211. Maximilian

    I find same-sex marriage a very important issue, since it would grant fundamental rights to caring people who deserve legal acknowledgment of their love!

    I am from Switzerland, a country that provides marriage-like rights to lesbians and gays (since 5 years). We are still a prospering country with moral integrity. So much for the dangers of this so called evil!

    August 9, 2010 at 7:43 pm | Reply
  212. JesusNeedsABreak

    I say its all good! less procreation to boot. But what this issues embroils is man is not as free as he thinks or why should he have to fight for this right as well as any right. Shame on you Gov and church.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:44 pm | Reply
  213. Jininabottle

    The problem people have with it is that it "redefines marriage", which is a perfectly legit argument. Let marriage stay in religion, its up to the religion to define marriage. It's up to the state to define civil unions. People get married for much worse reasons than love. Sex, money, fame, and many other reasons I'm sure.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:47 pm | Reply
  214. Jarrell

    I'm for it.
    I see a lot of people here invoking Sodom and Gomorrah, but a proper study into scripture shows that the cities were not destroyed because of homosexuality. Far from it actually. But that's what people are taught that the Bible says, so that's what they keep on parroting, over and over again. Check the Hebrew, check all subsequent references about S&G in scripture and see what they really say.
    Some are saying it's not in God's plan because they can't have children. I say who mandates that any couple has children for their union to be recognized? Should elderly people not be allowed to marry? What about those who are medically or mentally not able to have children? Should we take away their right to marry?
    Some say it's not a sin to be gay, but it's a sin to act on it. So they should either ignore they have a sex drive or pretend they're attracted to the opposite sex and marry anyway, thereby destroying 2 lives instead of one?
    Some say traditional marriage is the only true marriage. Which tradition are we talking about, polygamy of the Bible? Polygamy was considered marriage in the United States until 1899. Do you mean the traditional marriage that didn't allow Blacks to marry, or didn't allow inter-racial marriage until it was finally federally recognized in 1967?

    Why are we still arguing about this? How can there still be a popular vote by the majority to limit the civil rights of a minority? Why not let people be happy, people who are already commited to one another and want to share their lives together, without demanding they live by your personal code of ethics?

    August 9, 2010 at 7:52 pm | Reply
  215. Denise

    I want to add that although i would not go against gay marriage laws, I want to state clearly that this should not be something that is forced on any church or religious body to perform. If the couple wants to get married, they should do it in a civil court of law and all the trappings that a legal marriage affords should also be afforded to the gay couple. The gay nuptials should not be forced on any religious body however, the religious body should always have the option whether to consent to the performance of the ceremony, or not.
    The same way I am not against legalized gambling, smoking, drinking – I do not expect anyone to come into my church and do either of these activities, without me having the right to ban them from the church. So I hope in legalizing gay marriage, it does not supercede the right of any religious body to deny the ceremony from occurring in their facility. Otherwise I would oppose it.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:52 pm | Reply
  216. Jared

    Further clarification on my previous comment regarding marriage not being defined by the ability to reproduce.

    "Based on your arguments that same-sex couples cannot conceive (even though they can, using the same methods are a vast number of opposite sex couples do), then they too should not be allowed to marry."

    "they" being opposite-sex couples.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:52 pm | Reply
  217. Kenneth Bright Boateng

    It's unfortunate that humans are pressing hard to reducing the privilege of being the first among living organisms into something worse. If the proponents of this assertion have been from parents of same sex unions, how could they have been procreated

    August 9, 2010 at 7:53 pm | Reply
  218. R. Boyce

    As a married heterosexual man, I can honestly say it's none of my damn business who can get married. Nor is it anyone else's. Marriage within a state or nation comes with rules. As long as they apply equally, who cares what gender you are? Oh yeah, the self appointed.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:54 pm | Reply
  219. Rich Knighton

    I have been with my Australian partner for 10 years and still have no legal way to bring him to my country of birth USA legally. We live in sydney, as australia does allow for gay foriegn partners to imigrate to Australia, but gay marrage is not legal here as well, but in the works. I am gay, not be chose, but by birth, genetics, God ,whatever people what to call it. All gay people know this. We cannot help who we are or who we love anymore than a straight person can. So why do we not have the same rights? Why are our partners not as important or matter? Because I love him I gave up my whole life and career to come here to be with him. If that is not love and commitment than I do not know what is! That is what marrage is to me. This not only effected me, but all the people who love and care about me, the next time someone says why should gays have special rights ask my mother or any mother who has had their son or daughter leave to be with their love because they had no other chose! I consider myself lucky, Australia is a wonderful place to live and allowed me to move here. What if he was from China or Uganda? Where would we live then? But if he were a woman I could marry and bring him to the states? That is not discrimanation? And the USA wants to make that law? I do not care what word is used to describe our union, Marrage civil unions etc, but we as citizens and human beings deserve to be able to love and share with the person we love just like anyone else. If others do not like it for whatever reasons so be it, but it should not affect my life or others because they are not comfortable with mine. That is not the constitution, that is just insane.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:54 pm | Reply
  220. atp

    What is the government doing with the religious term marriage in the first place? Use terms like unions or partnerships instead. Give benefits to all even to future polygamous partnerships. Just don't force Christians (or other religions) to accept something that isn't marriage as marriage especially when Jesus Christ himself didn't entertain the idea of husbands loving husbands or wives loving wives; not to mention Paul definitively saying they won't enter God's kingdom. Yes, to religious freedom. Yes, to letting people live same-sex partnerships or unions with full benefits. Yes to believers and non-believers agreeing to disagree for generations to come.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:54 pm | Reply
  221. Alex

    I see a lot of comments asking what is this world coming to?
    Answer: This world is coming to an age of equality for ALL. Not just for those of a certain race, financial status, or religious belief. I still don't understand why same-sex marriage. I have spent 23 years on this earth and have not been affected by gay marriage or gay relationships in general. Unfortunately in the 23 years I have been here though, I have seen countless acts of barbarism and murder in the name of God, Allah, or whatever generic deity one might claim. I do have one question though. How can so many people claim to love this wonderful nation we are a part of yet completely forget that this nation was founded on the belief of separation of church and state?

    August 9, 2010 at 7:56 pm | Reply
  222. Jay

    Who the hell am I to decide what's right, what's good for you. I wouldn't want you to dictate to me who I should or who I shouldn't marry, so why would I dictate the same to you.

    August 9, 2010 at 7:56 pm | Reply
  223. Melinda H

    I am for marriage. Any marriage that is based on love, whether it is between a man and woman, 2 men or 2 women. Marriage is about love and commitment not sexuality.

    just another "straight" woman!

    August 9, 2010 at 7:58 pm | Reply
  224. Rudolph

    Utterly disgusting!!

    August 9, 2010 at 8:04 pm | Reply
  225. Dion Goldie

    South Africa has the most liberal Gay Rights laws in the world and for the last 2 and a half years its been legal for same sex couples to get married here!

    As a Marriage Officer (Officiant) who is accredited by the SA Government to perform Same Sex weddings, it has been my priveledge and honour to be part of couples big day! As a veteran of some 800 hetrosexual weddings, I see very little difference between performing a wedding for a same sex couple as a hetrosexual couple! They are after all two people who love each other and have chosen to live alife with each other as each others spouse!

    Instead of judging people because of some archaic ideaology or because it makes you feel uncomfortable, why not be happy for people who have been able to find love and despite the biggotted attitudes in the world are still able to make a life for themselves!

    I will continue to be a part of couples big day as long as they feel I can add value to their lives through the type of ceremony I perform for them! Their gender, sexual orientation, race or political persuasion has no bearing on the love they feel for each other and the life they elect for themselves!

    Leave the judging to God, and stop throwing stones! Look to your own house before you judge others!

    Dion Goldie
    Marriage Officer
    South Africa

    August 9, 2010 at 8:05 pm | Reply
  226. Ted Steiner

    Let's be clear: If you want to pass legislation specifically denying rights to a group of individuals, the following are NOT acceptable reasons:
    1. Because it's always been done this way, throughout history
    2. I believe in it, based on my religion

    Here are acceptable reasons:
    1. It will harm society and this harm outweighs the benefit to the discriminated group
    2. Giving rights to one group will necessitate taking bigger rights away from another group

    This reasoning is very simple, logical, and critical to the functioning of a democratic society. The anti-marriage forces have NEVER been able to formulate an argument that same-sex marriage will harm society or violate anyone else's rights.

    If you voted for an anti-marriage law in your state, then I would ask you to stop, take a deep breath, and think about how important it is to you. Yes, I know, you may have grown up in a time or place where sexuality was not openly discussed or acknowledged. You may find it frightening to imagine two men or two women having sex with each other, or even kissing each other. You might feel terribly uncomfortable if a woman introduces you to her wife. But are you so selfish that you would ruin other people's lives to prevent this discomfort? And yes, lack of equal rights does ruin gay people's lives. Just like the same lack of rights ruined many African-American lives throughout American history.

    Here's a good test. Would you be willing to look a family member, friend, or co-worker in the eye and say to him/her: "I think your relationship is wrong and is inferior to mine. I think you do not deserve an equal place in society. I don't want you to be able to file taxes jointly with your spouse. If your spouse is Canadian, I don't think you should be allowed to live together permanently in the U.S.–you'll just have to find someone else." If you think it's OK to say these things to someone you know, then by all means cast your vote against marriage equality. But if those things feel mean-spirited, petty, or otherwise wrong, then why would you vote for something you wouldn't feel right about doing in person?

    It's obvious that this is an emotional issue, and the only way to make everyone comfortable with gay marriage is to understand the emotional needs that anti-marriage forces have, and to reassure them that all of our lives will only be enriched, not harmed, when our society is truly fair.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:09 pm | Reply
  227. Pheasant

    It is up to same sex couples to contract any kind of union wether we like it or not.
    My concern is that it should never be called "marriage" as this refers specifically to the union of a man and a women which I believe need to be recognized as such. I guess anyone would agree that the way man and woman are sharing and planing their lifes difers significantly from those of same sex couples. The semantic should therefor clearly be specific.
    The problem is that there is so far no substitute to the word "marriage"!

    August 9, 2010 at 8:09 pm | Reply
  228. Jim

    What I find amazing is the Bible quotes and the references that are selected to negate the granting of equal right to all. Reference to Genesis and Adm and Eve seem to be the basis of arguments of the right wing religious zealots, so let me ask you this ...Adam and Eve had two sons Cain and Abel...you do the math. You can quote the Bible to support your distorted views to deny equal rights to someone, can you then explain, incest ...please give me an answer great Bible thumpers!

    Thisis not a religious issue, this country is not a theocracy, this is a matter of civil rights. Mormons believe in polygamy, why should they have 2 wives , when so many people only wqant one husband! 50 years ago blacks and whites couldn't marry...again this is a civil issue of people trying to deny rights to another group. Wake up stop the discrimination and ithe hate mongering. The Church, the Bible, The Koran, the Great Book, etr al do not set the rules. This country was founded on religious freedom and it is important that people realize this is not a matter of religion it is a matter of civil rights.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:10 pm | Reply
  229. Brian

    Why do gay people want to marry in a church where men and women marry each other?
    Why do gay people want to marry anyway?

    Do they have an urge to be heterosexual or do they just want to belong to normal society?

    I am not bothered if they want to marry...Get married in a gay church by a gay vicar or priest.

    Do not invade my human rights as a heterosexual, loving parent. Do not invade my ethics or morality please. You can marry sheep for all i care, just do not take away or devalue my beliefs, my church or my way of life. I do not want you shoved in my face as something to be proud of! Oh dear, does that make me homophobic or does that make me fed up with all this gay pride stuff? OK your proud to be gay, so what? I am proud to be herterosexual but i am not parading around about it am I!!

    wE all know you are there so Give us a break and shut up!!

    August 9, 2010 at 8:11 pm | Reply
  230. Joey

    Marriage is a fundamental right. I am tired of bigoted people hiding behind the Bible to guise their hatred for Gay people. As a religious person, this is the most disgusting thing I see in this debate. If you don't believe in Marriage between two loving and committed people then you don't have to participate in it. Your bigoted church can deny Marriage to whomever they want. I am lucky to belong to a church that supports the unions of loving couples.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:12 pm | Reply
  231. Nina

    We tend to oppose what we are not accustomed to whether it is habits, cultures, looks... In the end we are all the same and we all strive for the same basic needs and wants, including love and perhaps a life-long partner to whom we chose to get married...

    I am in favor of gay marriage. I didnt chose to be born straight, neither did people who were born gay, why should i be allowed to get married and they not... just because something about them is different?

    Live and let live 🙂

    August 9, 2010 at 8:15 pm | Reply
  232. ann

    Well, it doesn't matter if one is against it–it is happening and the "will of the people" does not include denying others their humanity. As a gay woman, I would like to thank my straight brothers and sisters for their support.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:17 pm | Reply
  233. Diana

    The court's opinion was a long time coming. Its about justice and fair and equal treatment under the law, pure and simple. Ideals this country was founded upon. One step I applaud!

    August 9, 2010 at 8:18 pm | Reply
  234. E Polin

    As long as marriage is not limited to complementary genders, why on earth would it still be limited to two individuals only? Why wouldn't three individuals of any gender get married altogether, then? Why not four? What is so magic of the number two... if it isn't being the number of genders?

    Our times will be a big laugh in the future, as the late Romans are to us.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:20 pm | Reply
  235. bob sea

    You can't plug a female end of an elecrical cord into a female outlet.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:21 pm | Reply
  236. Marcus

    The world need to live as one, God never intended people to judge each other or abuse/ disrespect the earth but instead Im sure he hopes they will eventually try and bring the best out of each other and through love and compassion for one another the earth will evolve into "The Golden Age"

    August 9, 2010 at 8:24 pm | Reply
  237. ann

    I am amazed–not saddened, as nothing can be done about such mindlessness–that there are people who believe that God hates gays. If true, why are there so many gays? And happy as heck to be gay, as they were meant to be. If God hates gays, why doesn't God get rid of them?

    August 9, 2010 at 8:24 pm | Reply
  238. sean

    In college I learnt tolerance but not acceptance. In the end, my own belief is that a man or a woman is free to do what soever they feel like doing in the confines of their own private space. Essentially though, i think it is troubling that a judge can overturn the will of a voting majority in any case. I understand the judge's position in overturning proposition 8 in California, but wonder if the democratic principles of majority rule on issues especially when it is put to a pleibescite can be overturned by anyone individual and that is regardless of the issue being considered.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:29 pm | Reply
  239. stsongas

    Why does anyone care who is married to who? While I am a strong proponent of gay marriage I disagree with the way this was forced on the people of California by a single judge. The courts are wielding too much power when a single judge can overturn the will of the majority of people.

    Let’s get to the real issues confronting our society instead of silly, mostly religious based distractions. I believe the real issues of our society are erosion of rights and privacy by an all encompassing government. Gun control, abortion, this gay marriage silliness are just red herrings to distract us by a state that is becoming more and more oppressive in the name of our “collective safety”.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:32 pm | Reply
  240. Paul French

    Absolute rubbish. It does not even happen in the animal kingdom yet human beings dominate every creation on earth. So where is the logic?

    August 9, 2010 at 8:32 pm | Reply
  241. Jarno

    Chuck Anziulewicz below put it eloquently – allowing same sex marriage does not take anything away from "traditional marriage", nor does allowing such a thing force individual churches to do anything they aren't comfortable doing.

    All the rationalizations of the anti-gay rights people are hollow, and cannot stand to critical scrutiny.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:32 pm | Reply
  242. Peter Dybing

    Reading about Prop 8 is making me crazy, same old bigoted arguments.
    Give woman the right to vote, “The American family will come to an end"
    Give people of color rights “American culture will fall apart"
    Allow the freedom to worship, “our children will be seduced by the devil" There is no gloom and doom in granting people the rights they should enjoy, only the possibility of enriching our culture .

    August 9, 2010 at 8:32 pm | Reply
  243. Mike

    All these supposedly 'religious' people that are so quick to judge and condemn others, and even bring out passages of the Bible, to support their hateful judgements and condescending views on homosexuals... Did you not read the entire Bible? you sure did miss out on the main message. Jesus came to save mankind, not to condemn. It is about loving and accepting everyone for what they are, and most of all, it is about being non-judgemental.

    I have news for you, I am gay, and there is not a day that goes by that I don't see God's love for me. I have prayed for a same-sex partner before and have received it, thanks to God's inmense Love. The Bible talks bad about sexual promiscuity and sexual perversion (this involves heterosexuals as well). I know it, I have read it countless times–it is my favorite book.

    Until you don't learn the most basic lesson that all the wisdom that comes from above is all love and forgiveness, whereas arguing and hatred comes only from below, you will not get anywhere spiritually. It's hard, I know, but that's just the way it is. You have to only love, because God is Love and Mercy. One day you too will learn this very fact.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:35 pm | Reply
  244. Rachel

    There is no "gay marriage", there's just marriage. I don't care which sexes it's between as long as there's love and mutual respect.

    I would prefer that a child be brought up in a loving family with two mothers or two fathers rather than an abusive heterosexual couples family, or vice versa.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:38 pm | Reply
  245. P L

    I have a very simplistic comment to make: legalizing gay marriage doesn't hurt anyone and it helps a lot of people, therefore (but definitely not only for that reason) I completely support it. I know some people are going to say that it hurts or offends them, but I fail to see how it could possibly hurt anyone – and being offended because it goes against some religious belief doesn't equal getting hurt.

    I would expand on my thoughts but, Chuck Anziulewicz (August 9th, 2010 1:47 pm ET) explained them much better than I could.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:39 pm | Reply
  246. Duro Olurotimi

    I am sickened with each passing day as I read what people are saying concerning gay marriage and homosexuality as a whole. Homosexuality is so disgusting!!! Its shocking that not only do people openly practice it, they are also seeking legislation to back up their unions involving this horrible acts!!! Its against the normal course of nature for GOD's sake!!! Let no one be deceived, homosexuality is from the devil through and through. As many of you that are involved in this shameful act, please desist and get out of it. No matter where you may do your so called wedding, this practice will only lead you to hell!!!!!

    August 9, 2010 at 8:40 pm | Reply
  247. Osas Osato

    Honestly i am disappointed that the US is now promoting such immorality in the name of supreme court rulings. Very soon, people will soon start making love to their dogs and then demand for endorsement. Homosexuality is a symptom of a society that has lost its way and is on its way down. Osas from Nigeria.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:42 pm | Reply
  248. Rob

    My church wants to be able to perform same sex marriages. Why should we be prohibited from having them? It's my religious freedom that's at stake, not religious conservatives' freedom. No one is trying to force conservative churches to perform marriages they don't want to perform.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:42 pm | Reply
  249. Mitch Yang

    Last year, after we posted a pro-Proposition 8 sign in front of our company building, some pro same sex marriage people smashed our conference room glass window, costing us thousands of dollars. Talking about tollerance!

    August 9, 2010 at 8:42 pm | Reply
  250. Jim

    Brian & E Polin

    It is not about religion it is about equal rights. A church can deny people the "sacrament" of marriage, the government has no right to. Yep there is a lot of "gay pride" events and it is visible....why because at present gays are a minority fighting for equality, look back in history to the groups that have been oppressed, Jews, Christians, the French Revolution, Black people that is why the manifestation of pride comes about because others make you feel less than equal. The comment about two, three, four......are you a Mormon? Seems there church and prophet say it is okay...get the big picture everyone who is so against gay marriage on a religious basis ....IT IS NOT ABOUT RELIGION IT IS ABOUT EQUAL RIGHTS..WE WANT TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE AS MISERABLE AS OVER 50% OF STRIAGHT COUPLE ARE THAT GET DIVORCED EVERY YEAR(ONLY KIDDING) ....COME ON God created all men equal no one can dictate that some are more equal than others....thank you George Orwell.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:43 pm | Reply
  251. Paul

    I am against it. The Bible is against it as well. I am not making this up. It does say a man shall not lay down with man. As well a woman should not lay down with woman. There hasn't been no proof of a man giving birth to a child and there never will be. God made man and woman in his own image. Adam didn't give birth to Cain and Abel. Eve gave birth to Cain and Abel.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:44 pm | Reply
  252. JoSchmo

    Disgsuting. Sign of the times and everything that is wrong. DISGUSTING!!!!!! GROSS!!!!!!! What's next? Bestiality made legal?

    August 9, 2010 at 8:46 pm | Reply
  253. aqib

    gay (homosexua) are the main curse on planet earth... htey should be deported to moon..

    August 9, 2010 at 8:47 pm | Reply
  254. Elvis Datarock

    The funny thing about the gay marriage debate is not the adjective but the noun. If we were debating gay infanticide or gay suicide bombing or gay cow tipping, I would understand why it's such a hot topic. Really, who wants gay people going around murdering folks or injuring cattle? That would be terrible.

    Fortunately, we are debating whether gay folks should get married. Marriage is in no way harmful if swallowed, it does not cause paper cuts and it does little to increase one's cholesterol with proper exercise.

    I say more marriage, straight or gay, will make the world a healthier, happier place.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:51 pm | Reply
  255. Jim

    Hey Paul

    so how did they procreate....3 men and one woman....sounds like incest to me. Do you see how feeble Bible arguments are? The Bible is an interpertation written by man over the centuries. There is artistic license, authors bias and influences. Wake up and understand what you are quoting!

    August 9, 2010 at 8:52 pm | Reply
  256. Dave

    If it's not about equal rights–then why aren't you satisfied with Civil Unions????

    Leave marriage a marriage and don't gayonise it!

    August 9, 2010 at 8:52 pm | Reply
  257. Connie Estrada

    Whether we believe in God or not doesn´t matter. He exists, and He will judge our nation based on what we do, whether or not we go by his rules for life. The Bible is very clear on the subject. It is important to know these things and not follow the crowd. Read Genesis 19 in the Torah, or Romans chapter 1, verses 26 through 32 in the New Testament. It is better to be on the good side of God, to follow Him. His love is incredible.

    August 9, 2010 at 8:55 pm | Reply
  258. James

    It is a sad chapter for humanity. The heart is so hardened that it just cant swallow the truth. Mankind is surely confused. You need to explain, fill and sign documents of loads of pages and wait for months to get permission to kill a rat, but a lady just has to choose for her to kill her unborn child and we call it civilisation and developed world. Gay marriage is surely wrong,but the heart of many is hardened and confused. They defend the perverse and the corrupt with so much passion. It will get worse but let those who want to stay true to the value of godliness secure themselves and their families though prayer and the love of God

    August 9, 2010 at 8:57 pm | Reply
  259. Elvis Datarock

    @Dave: "Whether we believe in God or not doesn´t matter. He exists..."

    Reread your opening line and really ponder if it makes any sense.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:00 pm | Reply
  260. Jose Acosta

    I don't care who someone marries, if they love one another. Nor do I see any reason to deny two adults of the same sex any less freedom to marry than those of opposite sexes. It's no one's business but theirs. So many 'straight' marriages fail, they've no right to claim theirs is the only 'right' way.
    Of course, I truly doubt that the US will ever allow the marriage of two people of the same sex. I'd love to be proven wrong, but there's just too many of those conservatives who feel they have the right to force their narrowminded version of morality on everyone else. Sad.
    Jose -St. Paul, MN USA

    August 9, 2010 at 9:01 pm | Reply
  261. Jason

    A gay relationship doesn't create any less of a marriage than a straight relationship. If churches want to define something different for straight people then let them! Call it A Christian Marriage if you want, I don't care.. Just as long as it doesn't affect the government and the legality of marriage. Gay people should have the right to file jointly, collect social security for spouses, adopt children, and any other right given to married couples. There is absolutely no difference in a gay household than a straight one except maybe kids grow up to be a little more open minded. You can't catch gayness from your parents because it's genetic not social!

    August 9, 2010 at 9:02 pm | Reply
  262. Dada Ogbegun

    American and the western world are heading for similar destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, by accepting gay marriage all for human right purposes. You people should not that God is no respecter of persons or nations. Gay marriage must be stopped now.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:03 pm | Reply
  263. Silencedogood

    Civil Unions, yes, "marriage", no. And before anyone jumps on me for that, I'd like to remind everyone that its also President Obama's position.

    Why, is the important question.

    This is not about denying a right, but instead, creating one. Homosexuality has existed for thousands of years (probably millions going back to our origin as a species). And not every culture has been hostile to it, most notably the Romans and Greeks. Yet gay marriage as an institution has never existed. Marriage was a religious, social, and cultural institution designed to facilitate reproduction.

    Things have moved on and many don't have kids or don't get married, yet the term "marriage" carries with it all of these traditions. Particularly in the religious context creating gay marriage will present unnecessary problems when the right to marry conflicts with the right to associate and/or the prohibition against servitude as churches will likely refuse to conduct such ceremonies.

    Civil unions offer all the same benefits–i.e. official recognition of status, health benefits, medical authority, etc. as a traditional marriage without those sticky side effects. If its a big problem for people to allow straight marriages without gay ones then just have government only recognize civil unions by straight and gay couples. Anything with marriage would be strictly a religious ceremony but not legally binding. Done and done.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:06 pm | Reply
  264. Ron

    Absolutely Disgusting !

    August 9, 2010 at 9:11 pm | Reply
  265. Green

    Let gay people be gay. God created them. He will always love them and protect them, like he always does.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:12 pm | Reply
  266. JJ

    It's disgusting and wrong!

    August 9, 2010 at 9:12 pm | Reply
  267. E Polin

    No, I am not a Mormon, rather a logician: before, marriage was between two people of opposite genders, now it is between two people of ANY gender. So, why on earth is it not between ANY number of people of ANY gender?

    Maybe that's a merely fiscal limitation: the IRS would not like us to be able to consolidate the revenues of too many people. Any other reason?

    August 9, 2010 at 9:15 pm | Reply
  268. lance

    Live and let live. If someone is against it, the same as religion, don't push it. People have a right to be openly gay as well as people having the right to not agree with it.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:15 pm | Reply
  269. anonymous

    If all men and all women on this earth became gay/lesbian tomorrow (God forbid), in a 100 or so years the human population will become extinct. Ask yourself the next time you look in the mirror, if everyone on earth is like you, what kind of contribution will you give to mankind and to the future generation of children. Think about the bigger picture and the impact your decision will have on everyone else.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:16 pm | Reply
  270. Leo Swindell

    So don't call it 'marriage', call it 'civil union'. The whole thing isn't about 'marriage' anyway, it's about equal rights for all people. They want nothing more or less than the same legal rights as everyone else, the same rights as any 'regular' married pair. If two choose to enter that social and legal contract, then that's perfectly acceptable.
    I fail to understand why what two human beings do in the privacy of their bedroom changes anything. How much evil has been perpetrated upon this world in the name of 'god' anyway? If there's a god, and I hope so, I hope s/he's laughing at all those who purport to judge others in his/her name.
    I think we all have better things to worry about these days.
    Marry whomever you wish, but be sure it's for and about love.

    Leo S. Roseville, Minnesota

    August 9, 2010 at 9:18 pm | Reply
  271. John Mullin

    The whole issue with Gay and Lesbian seems kinda perversion to be honest.
    Union is between the feminine and masculine aspect of nature. Thus production and creation takes place. This is the universal law made by God and nature. This is nature, irrespective of what a constitution of a country dictates or what a church claims.
    If we want to pervert it, it is of no use. Will we be next seeking rights to sleep with animals too? I want rights to do what I want?! All these loud Gay parades, demonstrations etc.. for what?
    If there is a disorder or abnormality, should it be promoted?
    Emotional attachment can be towards any one or anything. One may get emotionally attached to a pet or a piece of cloth. But should virtues and morality be a good part of modern society or should it be like the palace of Kaligula?
    I have no intentions to be disrespectful to anyone, individual or community. These are just some legitimate and natural questions that come to mind is all. The issue is controversial and some debate is there.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:20 pm | Reply
  272. Lawrence

    Gay marriage is an abomination and should never be allowed to exist in the present world. Let people that practise gay read the Holy Bible. Moreover they should forget about adopting children because those children they are adopting are born by women....it's just simple.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:21 pm | Reply
  273. Marc

    State and church must be maintained separate if we are to judge and decide wisely. Every single individual has the RIGHT to live as everybody else. Responsibility come on hand with having rights. If two people want to get married they should be allowed to. Religiuos views and morals should not HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH PEOPLES RIGHTS. Gay couples will have to pay taxes so the nation's economy would benefit. If Gay couples cannot marry then we should also forbid divorce, People who commit adultery should be stoned. TO DEATH..thats also written in the "holy book" that by the way was written by a group of guys that met this another guy named Jesus... I think the controversy stems by a lot of frustrated people that have lived under their beliefs and life hasn't been too kind... Don't worry, be happy...

    August 9, 2010 at 9:21 pm | Reply
  274. DJ

    Really? Are we still discussing this? Is this really the year 2010? Are we not adults? Can we not move past this onto real topics?

    Who cares? It is no ones right to thrust their opinion onto anyone else and make it law. Plus do we not have our own lives to deal with. I feel we have become gossiping hens who denounce anything that does not go with their "norm".

    If person A like Person B enough to love, honour and cherish, then do so and PLEASE be happy for the rest of your lives. NO QUESTION ASKED. Life is WAY (unable to make this "WAY" big enough for anyone to understand) too short to even abide by such absurdity.

    Tip: If this is the same situation where you live, within a year, I strongly suggest you move to where you can be happy.

    I thought this topic was something from the 80s ...

    August 9, 2010 at 9:22 pm | Reply
  275. James Palmer

    Why not allow the government to authorize and regulate civil unions and leave marriage to church. If it is a tax thing and a right thing, then let it be equal. If it is a religious thing, then let the church decide. But don't call people living together a marriage, no matter what the gender, number, or level of fidelity. Historically and religiously marriage is sacred. Why change that for the convenience of a few, who want what a civil union would give them.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:27 pm | Reply
  276. Jose Acosta

    Maybe this comment gets modded off too?
    In my first attempt to answer the solicitation of comments on this issue, I stated that I support the right of two people, regardless of sex, to marry, to form a civil union, or whatever they want to call it. All people in the US are supposed to have the same rights, at least that's what I thought.
    I dared, in my first attempt to post here, to say that I doubt the US will ever allow it nationally, because there's just too many of those conservatives left that feel they must dictate everyone else's morality. I used no inappropriate language, and was a lot more polite and decent than many of the rantings I see posted above me.
    So, CNN, here's my comment, a second time, real name and real email again too. You solicited comments, here's mine. OK?

    And, if you'll post this, thanks for asking the question. My daughter's entered into civil union with a girl she's loved for several years, and I'm deeply proud of her, she's a decent, educated, hard-working, moral woman, like her spouse.
    Jose Acosta -St Paul MN

    August 9, 2010 at 9:28 pm | Reply
  277. Karol Field

    I am not religious in any way. I do not denounce the idea of 'God'or any other diety. However, as a moral, decent, unpromiscuous bisexual man, I must put forward my opinion:

    I do not understand why any gay/lesbian/bisexual person would WANT to be 'married'in the traditional Christian sense. We are all told we are ímmoral, indecent'and will "pay for our sins in the face of our maker". If such a maker has a problem with the way I, or any of my ilk live, I demand that this maker let it be known, not through centuries -old books written by who-knows-who, not through bible bashers, and certainly not through priests from a morally-questionable church.

    I don't flaunt my lifestyle, but when I am having a well-deserved lie-in on a Sunday morning, like most decent, hard-wroking human beings, I find the church invading my personal space with their 'summons' to prayer,

    At six years old I found out about the Easter bunny, eight years old I found out about Santa, at sixteen, I found out about 'God'....I would love to be PROVEN wrong....we all need it....

    August 9, 2010 at 9:28 pm | Reply
  278. Vladi

    Marriage protects. Marriage is a promise that two people give each other to stay together no matter what. God is their witness. I can't imagine why God shouln't love a gay person since He is his creator.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:29 pm | Reply
  279. Gus

    I think what matters most to those who oppose it is the word "marriage" itself. In the traditional meaning of the word there is a husband and a wife who can have children; this does not happen in same sex couples and it sort of distorts the meaning of the word. There is no reason not to allow couples that wish to live faithfully together for the rest of their lives (or until they change their minds) all the legal benefits and even obligations that come from being married.... only why not call it something else. I don't oppose gay couples, but when I say I am married I don't want to be asked if to a woman or a man, I have been married for many years and the meaning of this word is dear to me and I don't want it changed. How about "linked"? Gay people have a wedding and get linked; the partners could refer to their significant others as "my link". I don't care what they call it, but if we are to care about gay rights then we are to care about the rights of the straight too.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:30 pm | Reply
  280. Ed Praschak

    My opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Everybody has one (an opinion). Open the Bible to Genesis 1:1 and continue ready through the rest of the Bible to get God's views on this subject.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:33 pm | Reply
  281. Pray

    Don't hate the homosexuals, hate the action. And pray for them.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:34 pm | Reply
  282. Christine

    @Dan McGill We've had to spend plenty of time with heterosexual behaviour "in our face"- despite the fact that maybe some of us don 't like it. In fact, there are probably lots of things that you and I and many people don't enjoy seeing, be it two people kissing in public or people dressed in too skimpy clothes or even people talking loudly on their cell phones in public. And yet that has never been a good reason to ban such behaviour. Your personal likes and dislikes have no relevance. Also, remember that gay marriage will not stop gays from being open in the public, nor will it heighten it. Marriage doesn't mean I'm going to start making out with my partner in public more often. You will, in fact, have no idea if I am married to the person I am holding hands with or not. So gay marriage is not "in your face." It is a private bond between two people. The LGBT community is here to stay, like it or not. We will remain as visible as we are now whether we get married or not. It is simply our desire to have the same rights as heterosexual couples, which is a private matter. You and the general public will never have to deal with that.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:36 pm | Reply
  283. James Lay

    The very fact that this even has to be discussed. That humanity, in part, is so small minded that we feel we have the right to say who can who love who and how.

    That should give you my answer on how I feel on this topic.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:37 pm | Reply
  284. Kyle

    As far as I know marriage is one of of seven sacral rituals described by the religious studies. almost any religion denounces same sex marriage, so what's the point I don't get it? same as saying I don't believe in god, but I want to go to church...

    August 9, 2010 at 9:43 pm | Reply
  285. Michael

    It was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve

    August 9, 2010 at 9:44 pm | Reply
  286. Mark

    Two steps in the right direction towards equality and fairness:

    1. Legalize gay marriage.
    2. Ban religion.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:50 pm | Reply
  287. JohnJohn

    Gay Americans marrying has no bearing on religion. They can choose to have a civil ceremony. In fact, many churches want to perform gay marriages (Unitarian, Church of Christ, now the Lutherans) but these unions are not recognized by the state – isn't this an infringement on freedom of religion? How do you accomodate the Churches that WANT to marry gays? Should the Government regulate religion? No...therefore...let them marry!

    August 9, 2010 at 9:51 pm | Reply
  288. Adiani

    When we humans fight over what is right and wrong we get all emotionally involved and often loose track of our true moral duties. Therefore, I am demanding that God, the Almighty, who sees all, knows all and can do all stand up and take a stand one way or the other. I am giving him until Wednesday August 11, at noon to make his displeasure at gay marriage known for all the world to see in such a way that thereafter, there will be no need for further argument. He shall with one stroke, do away with the judge and all those who opposed prop. 8, and hail down fire and brimstone and totally destroy the city of San Francisco. To all the supporters of Prop 8, he shall place shining halos around their heads with angelic voices singing "Holy Holy Holy", the participating churches will find their coffers filled with gold. On the other hand, if he does not care if gays get married or not, he can just do nothing and we can then over turn Prop 8, and get ready for a very busy season of gay weddings.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:54 pm | Reply
  289. John Mullin

    @Vladi, the very idea that God created "gay" is wrong in itself. God did not create gay or anything. These are a person's tendencies that he develops due to his attachment (right or wrong) to a certain idea in a previous or present time. People develop tendencies. They may inherit them from a past life. I may believe in that. God does not need to make Gays. Its a man's own action.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:58 pm | Reply
  290. Jose Diego

    Homosexuality is not a "new" concept. It's discussed in the Bible, with extensive clarity. These things were happening in the ancient days as well. It was scripturally prohibited then, as it is now.

    The ancient Israelites had no secular goverment when freed from Egyptian slavery. They had only what they needed, God himself. And through Moses, God gave the people commands and laws to live by that would keep them physcially, mentally, morally, as well as spiritually clean. The surrounding nations that would not submit themselves to God's loving arrangement suffered greatly. Disease, injustice, insecurity, and unrest became apart of their lives.

    God is not unloving towards his human creation, but he is also just and righteous. His Word condemns acts of homosexuality, as well as fornication and adultery, among other things, because it deems a person as living their life below the clean, holy, and loving standards that God himself instituted for mankind.

    Contrary to popular belief, He does not desire to destroy anyone to be destroyed, but desire all to live and be happy under His future rule. The life we live now is not His. The scriptures go on to show how this world is in the "power of the wicked one", or Satan the Devil. This explains the rotten state of the world and the life in it – completely opposite the message the Bible teaches about the kingdom God promises in the near future.

    Of course, God wants all those who serve him to do so out of the heart, and "not by compulsion". Therefore, He does not force anyone to comply to His commands, allow each person free will. However, he does promise that He will not let this world, and those who are blatantly and purposely wicked and hard hearted living upon it, to go for much longer. He is a God of perfect justice, and will have to bring an end to this wickedly run world as well as those who refuse to align their lifestyle according to his loving standards.

    All of this turmoil we see happening is prophesied to occur according to the scriptures. So there is really little that imperfect man can do. But the afterwards is a time of peace and happiness only God himself can provded for those who prove themselves deserving. Now is the time to take sides with God and work hard to live by His standards.

    August 9, 2010 at 9:58 pm | Reply
  291. Jeremy

    Although I don't agree with homosexuality, like the abortion issue I think it's up to those involved to make the decision to be homosexual. If that person decides to be homosexual and has a partner that they love they should be able to get the same benefits as a heterosexual couple would get by being married.

    Conservative (read christians) people seem to think that the work Marriage is somehow religious, so to appease these people the govt can call it something different than marriage, but still give the same benefits to those individuals who go through the homosexual marriage ceremony.

    It's no different than women voting, blacks having freedom, etc. All of these things relate to a religion in some way shape or form...there is no reason not to give these people some kind of benefits to having a 'life partner'.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:02 pm | Reply
  292. Andrew

    To the poster who equated secular to godless, WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT?

    To paraphrase Richard Dawkins, all of us are Atheists with regard to the vast majority of gods and goddesses that humans have worshipped. Some of us just go one god better.

    Don't ban gay marriage, ban religion. The world will be a far better place.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:03 pm | Reply
  293. Jeremy

    Definition of Marriage:

    1. the state of being a married couple voluntarily joined for life (or until divorce)
    2. Marriage is a social union or legal contract between individuals that creates kinship. It is an institution in which interpersonal relationships, usually intimate and sexual, are acknowledged in a variety of ways, depending on the culture or subculture in which it is found

    3. To be joined together as spouses according to law or custom; To unite in wedlock or matrimony; to perform the ceremony of joining spouses, ostensibly for life

    Obviously our 'customs' dont allow for #3 to apply to homosexual couples... no where in any of the definitions do I see anything related to heterosexual couples.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:06 pm | Reply
  294. carol

    I find the fact that the USA states calls it self the land of the free and brave a bit UNTRUE.
    First a judgment is past that as long as you are willing to FIGHT for the country you live in you will have opportunity. Then , Oh , you can not get good health care because will the illness you have is an issue with your sexual preference. Then Join and fight we need you but don;t tell us who you are or who is named to receive your benefits if you are killed in battle. The best one is Don't bring your lover to ANY functions!

    For the record I am a straight person in a gay wonderful world. WHY?? well the truths are forth coming and I don't get judged because of my gender only the ability of my work.

    Marriage between 2 persons is hard, painful, and can be testing. Raising a family is the same way. yet I have experienced both sides,being a Mother I raise my hands to friends that are raising the MOST stable children I have ever met.
    I married. I have been to a few same sex marriages they lasted and are still going stronger than mine. So whoever wishes to say wrong,remember this Families grow from love not whether one is a female and one a male. You don't need to create a child to love them, you just need to LOVE.

    Home of the free and brave??
    free from others stero-types?
    free from hatered?
    free from bigotry?
    free to be the person you were born to be?
    free to love a person?
    free to live with an open mind?

    The country was made on the brave men and women because they wanted a life. Are we NOT brave enough to Love the people that are giving love??
    Shame on you
    Shame on the USA
    SHAME – SHAME on the Government

    August 9, 2010 at 10:06 pm | Reply
  295. Allison Schroeder

    The main issue that we are dealing with with gay marriage is the separation of church and state. Mariage is considered both a spiritual and a social/legal contract. I propose that all "mariage" be of the religous kind, and that civil unions include everyone not just a special category for gays and lesbians. If everyone had to apply for a civil union, then this would not be questioned- everyone would have equal protection under the law. No one person would have the ability to have more rights than another because of religous dogma. Then, if the couple wishes to have a religous ceremony mariage completely seperate of the legal union, that couple would participate with that organization as they see fit. I know churches that will not marry people of different faiths, I know churches that will not marry if the couple has been living together- that is thier right to refuse. The state however has no reason to deny these partnerships for any couple that wishes to enter into a legal contract. Let religion be religion, and law be law- allowing people to marry who they want and in what context- if this means that everyone has a civil union, and only those who are affilliated with churches have a "marriage" so be it. This is the most fair and equal treatment we can have. I am not religous, but heterosexual- could I get married in a church- maybe some, so I want to? No- so I would do a civil ceremony that was a civil union. My uncle and his partner should be allowed to have the same rights as a straigt couple who is married by the law. Religous ritual should be removed from the contract in the eyes of the law- let those who go to churches do thier ceremonies there. Equal rights for all under the law.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:12 pm | Reply
  296. Jeremy

    "All those who violate the sacraments of God are going to have to answer to God, not man, and God could care less what their excuses or opinions are"

    Well then by that reasoning, what difference does it make if gays get married? Judge not lest ye be judged.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:13 pm | Reply
  297. Osawemwenze L. O.

    The debate about same sex marriage is far beyound individual liberty or freedom, religious beliefs......... It is a crime against nature. Nature does not in any way give support to same sex marriage. It is very unnatural no mather how the advocate of same sex marriage try to paint it. Have we ever wondered about procreation? Do we think of the future generation? How cound these be realized with same sex marriage?

    August 9, 2010 at 10:14 pm | Reply
  298. Marc

    The real problem with gay marriage is actually a straight marriage problem. In the USA (like most other countries), the same term "marriage" is used to designate a union which is recognized both by Church and State.

    When the US Constitution was drafted, one of the founding principles was the separation of Church and State. The purpose at the time was for the people to have liberty of religion.

    For a better separation of Church and State, the Church should have kept its marriage and the State should only recognize "legal unions" or "civil unions".

    It's not a matter of morality or of religion. The matter of gay marriage is just an issue of equality, that and using the appropriate vocabulary in the US legal system.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:20 pm | Reply
  299. Hugo

    The homo sapiens is so proud of it's own superiority and it's little man-made stories....

    Marriage is just another story. No group of lovers require a paper to recognize their love. But society decided to give a benefit for couples who remain together.

    Maybe that's the problem... why benefit couples who decide to make a life-long decision? In a modern world where more than 40% couples eventually get a divorce...

    It's time to change the entire notion of marriage. Approving same-sex marriage will be a step further for that.

    Religions con tellers have nothing to say regarding the matters of the state, they are qual to everybody else. To even consider that there is a sky-daddy that aproves or not what we do, is silly.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:20 pm | Reply
  300. Saiki

    When I was a child, I sat down with my parents and watched South Pacific. I couldn't understand why one of the characters would not marry the girl he loved because he was not white, and my parents struggled to explain it to me. To me it seemed obvious – there were two people in love. That was all that should matter. I have a feeling that is how it will be with my children some day. They will look back on this time with confusion, wondering why it was even a question that two people in love, no matter what gender they both were, could not marry.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:21 pm | Reply
  301. Scott


    August 9, 2010 at 10:22 pm | Reply
  302. dantanner

    We (wife and I) are opposed. Traditional marriage has biological, social, and economic purposes that any other form of so-called marriage does not and can not. We are not religious.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:26 pm | Reply
  303. EJ247

    I approve of gay marriage. And as far as people who say marriage is Gods law, they are narrow-minded, bigoted and wrong. God created this Earth BILLIONS of years before man created religions.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:27 pm | Reply
  304. Ron Hardyman

    It must be terrible to be "straight" and have to spend SO much of your daily life THINKING about what gay people are DOING.

    I've never been THAT bored.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:29 pm | Reply
  305. Marc

    I think we should outlaw marriage between people who are left handed. Everyone knows that being left handed is a sign of the devil. Teachers have forced children to use their right hand in the not so distant past. Left handed people are evil and should not be allowed to reproduce. They should be banned from marriage.

    Sadly enough, this kind of suggestion might have caught not that long ago. Scary, isn't it?

    August 9, 2010 at 10:30 pm | Reply
  306. Crysee

    For you religious creeps, you should notice that marriages are not done only by priests in churches. The only marriages I've been to (3 in my family) have been done out of churches and by chaplains and judges. In my family, people getting married by priests after the 1960s is simply a weird concept.
    The point is that marriage can no longer be associated with religion. Marriage is a civil matter that is managed by the government. If you bring your god or religion into this debate, than you are simply a fool.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:36 pm | Reply
  307. DeCrazy

    I find it hilarious that what most people use as their argument against gay marriage is a bronze age book full of reasoning that is out dated by millennium.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:43 pm | Reply
  308. Daniel Ward U.K

    I think same-sex marriage is really a moral question rather than something to be legislated on by the state. I am a minister in the U.K and so morally I am against same-sex relationships for committed Christians however, I do not believe it is my right to enforce my morality upon those who reject it.

    Yet, there are points I think that we have to responsibly consider in society.

    For obvious reasons same-sex marriage is not the same as heterosexual marriage. I think in the war for terminology between the right and left lobbyist groups, the placing of the same sex relationship into the same brackets of that of as a heterosexual relationship is slightly illogical, as both relationships even in commitment are different and can never fulfil the same fundamental requirements. That is to provide children, but they also will lack in some areas that a heterosexual relationship does not with the personality mixes of male and female. This is also true in reverse order, heterosexual relationships will not have the same "quirks" as a same sex relationship.

    I think we need to be honest and take the primal emotion out of this heated debate and simply accept there there is a distinction in the committed relationships between same and opposite sex couples and this should be distinguished in some way. I believe that there is value is recognising difference just as there is in promoting unity.

    For this reason I am against same sex relationships being defined as marriage, as I think it is dishonest to the terminology.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:45 pm | Reply
  309. breda2

    Love is for all people, not for one group. If the couple wants to legalization beeing together, they have to have this possibility.
    It`s the some for hetero – and homolife

    August 9, 2010 at 10:45 pm | Reply
  310. Smiley

    Marriage as a government-sanctioned institution should be banned altogether for both straights and gays. Whatever happened to separation of church and state? Do we have our government sanction bar mitzvahs, baptisms, and confirmations? Civil unions are one thing, but marriage is an archiac, burdensome, tired, and wornout tradition that has long past its usefulness in society.

    Why do gays want to co-opt the misguided folly of marriage? Less than a few decades ago, marriage was meant to control and castigate women and treat them like property. Go back a century or two and research shows that most poor people could never afford marriage and marriage was the domain of the wealthy elite who wanted to consolidate and preserve their riches with complex legal entanglements.

    Sure, marriage has "matured" beyond that to include a bridal industry and farcical romantic delusions, but marriage is a utter hoax. Would my government have me believe that a married couple today will spend eternity together in heaven? I certainly hope not.

    The truth is, marriage has lasted so long because it has been an effective, if discriminatory, business arrangement meant to keep the rich rich and the poor poor.

    How many wealthy families became unfairly wealthier because of marriage alliances? Worse yet, how many single people were kept poor and subjected to discrimination simply because they wanted to remain independent and free of restrictive lifestyles?

    Traditionally, gays who chose to live as unmarried to the opposite sex were substantially poorer, ridiculed, and discriminated against. Single people, and many of them were and are gay, have continually subsized marriage by not benefitting from convoluted alliances created by inheritance law, paying higher taxes and being treated like second class citizens- socially, economically, and culturally.

    There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with being single and a liberated individual. As one, I am sick and tired of paying the costs for marriages, divorces, and the countless discriminations way-laid on single people in favor of the "marriage and divorce industry."

    How many times has the adult single person heard... "Well, your not married and/or well, you don't have kids"... as a preface to some sort of subsidy or discrimination one is asked to endure?

    Of all people, gays should understand that. Gays should work to ban ALL marriage and continue to emancipate the individual from the shackles of tryanny, unfair laws, and misguided traditions.

    Most horribly, marriage is an instrument of the established order to CONTROL behaviors that are palatable to religious mouthpieces and conservative politicians. Yet, these very leaders seldom prove to be good role models themselves.

    I would offer to you, marriage IS the problem, being gay certainly is not!
    Which begs the question, why should any married couple have more
    rights than any two separate individuals?

    Ban marriage NOW and reclaim the sanctity of the individual because it is the individual the government is meant to protect- not arcane religious rites of passage.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:50 pm | Reply
  311. Dave Kaminski

    Same sex marriage is ok, but it is not normal and probably never will be, especially in the eyes of children. If you even ask a two-five year old about "Johnny wanting to marry mark" they have always said "no that does not work" because they know that its not normal and they feel like there is something wrong with it. When I say wrong I do not mean it in a bad sense. Its just not natural. Lets put it this way: Lets say that homosexuality is just as normal and natural as pedophilia. Is there a differencet? All animals ingage in it as do monkeys of course.
    You see its in peoples genes that homosexuality is not normal according to societis long lived way of life, but according to the animal kingdom its very much normal and natural with homosexuality, pedophilia, rape, murder, stealing, fighting, eating, sleeping, shiting, loving. That is what all living things do.
    But gay couples adopting children...now that is en entire different issue. I could go along with gays adopting children from an older age perhaps from 10+ or someting but definately not small children or babies. These small children need a mother and a father for many different reasons. It all goes down to freuds theory of development.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:51 pm | Reply
  312. E. Moone

    No disrespect, but same-sex marriage to me, whether man and man or woman and woman, is simply not my cup of tea. it just doesn't wash. the way we have known marriage ever since as between man and woman, a union through marriage between the same gender seems like, pardon me, an outcry against nature. i have no personal ill will against gays of any gender, this is just what i just my stand, or opinion. thanks a lot.

    August 9, 2010 at 10:53 pm | Reply
  313. Maria

    Oh lord! I can not believe the things that have been said here.... first of all "legislation for gay rights is a real crime against humanity" how???? How is it that several people have compared same sex marriage to incest, pedophilia, rape and murder? And James.... your theory on how homosexuality would be wiped out in two generation if it was genetic is absurd. Down syndrome for instance is often accompanied by infertility, yet is has been around by generations...

    August 9, 2010 at 10:56 pm | Reply
  314. lawrence harwin


    August 9, 2010 at 11:08 pm | Reply
  315. Ryan McVey

    Regardless of your thoughts on this sensitive issue, I think we are all overlooking a very obvious solution. Marriage is a word is in need of a clear definition in our federal laws, and if the Church wishes to hold the rights in defining this word, it has no place in our constitution thus should be substituted with a word in which our legislators may define in a way that reflects our anti-discriminatory policies. The word union has been used in an attempt to offer "equal but separate" treatment for homosexuals, but why not use this word as the substitution so thats the government could then apply it to all that choose to commit to another person, and wish the benefits that accompanies it. What the couples, and other organizations choose to label this is their own business.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:24 pm | Reply
  316. Michael

    We have had homosexual marriage for 5 yrs now. They are legally equal in every way – so you would think they would simply lives their lives? No. They still whine and snivel because millions of people just don't believe in it. Now they are muscling their ways into schools to force feed children, they use the human rights organizations to force people who simply express a point of view different that theirs into submission, and expect the government to give them money at every turn for every whim they can think of. If you do pass homosexual marriage, set limits or it will never end.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:33 pm | Reply
  317. Jeff

    If two people want to be legally responsible for each other, then so be it. As long ALL married people are held to and bound by the same obligations with regard to laws...go for it.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:34 pm | Reply
  318. Trevor

    The term 'gay marriage' is an oxymoron, and those who support are only adding to the confusion, angst and pain of the human race.

    There is a given-way for humanity to experience love, joy, security and sexual union, and that given way is marriage and family, where marriage is between one man and one woman. This one-flesh union reflects the union of God, and mutual indwelling, within his own being as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

    Marriage is a gift from God. It is recognised by the State, and so made official at government level for the right ordering of society. It protects society from the madness and pain of polygamy, and of all other destructive arrangements, including polyamory, where people just shack up together, like monkeys, and 'do it' with whomever.

    We are not always naturally progressing as a society. Sometimes it is regression. I predict, that just as society looks back on the terrible treatment of Australian Aboriginal children 'stolen', from their parents, society will look back on the present madness of pro-gay arrangements, and ask 'Whatever were they thinking?'.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:34 pm | Reply
  319. william fitzwater

    I am glad the court ruled in favor of gay marriage. However the court has also redified the meaning of marriage. While I can understand it is a issue of lifestyle and also of money. Now if gay couples abtain married status a whole host of issues including paternity , inheritance, spousal agreement will also effect them no to mention insurance benefits etc.

    This is a big money issue as well.

    As a Christian though I still believe in traditional marriage between one woman and one man. What the law can do is allow gays to marry outside the church.

    However the Constitution does not force a Church or Pastor or religious leader to marry homosexuals which would be in direct violation of their beliefs. As long as it is this way I have no problems.

    If the state forces the clergy to marry homosexuals couples I would have a problem with that.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:36 pm | Reply
  320. I ONeal

    I disagree with gar marriages, and supporting gay marriages from the courts is a shame. The bible say's there is a way that seems right to a man, but the end there of leads to death. Death is the only things that comes from this kind of behavior.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:42 pm | Reply
  321. Himali

    I am sorry but I absolutely oppose 'Gay Marriage' .For me it is similar to seeking the right of walking into the main road rather than walking into the pavement.It is similar to the right of marriage between brothers and sisters, mother and son, father and daughter.In future if the right activities ask the right to marry between their same family members which is seen too distant now as the Gay Marriage was seen before couple of decades, will it be logical to provide the right to marry among each family members? Will not this kind of act bring complete chaos to the family and social cohesion.We are human, we have sense and sensibility and we cannot act as animals.Gay Marriage is a Psychological state of mind which can be corrected by counseling.If someone is attracted towards same sex, that is state of mind which I see similar to depression or other psychological problems and it can be corrected.In the name of human right, we cannot compromise the family and social human existance.Okay what about the right of the people who oppose the Gay Marriage? This is really a very serious problem and it needs to be addressed very early age if someone is attracted towards same sex by counseling and therapies.I have firm believe that with counseling it can be solved.Even the animals do not go for same sex, how on earth we human beings are inclined to same sex marriage.In order to maintain family and social bond, same sex marriage has to be addressed differently so that our future generations will not blame us and tell us how uncivilised we were.It can be similar as we are regreting what we think logical to do before.For example engaging in war, destroying the climate.Now we realised those were insane act and we are after correcting those mistakes now.I hope we will not have to repeat the same mistake by allowing the same sex marriage.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:43 pm | Reply
  322. mike

    so if my dog feels allright with this we should be able to get married?!

    August 9, 2010 at 11:45 pm | Reply
  323. mymessage2010

    To mý understanding same-sex merriage is some thing which is out of human nature. Look even wildanimals, they don't make sexual intercourse between same-sex partners. What is natural both in humans and animals is hetrosexual partnership. It is very surprising to see such shamfull culture in civilized Society where there are more opportunities for advanced education that can shape mentality of people.

    Actually my personal worry is not whether constitutions going to allow same-sex merrage or not, it is the lose of millions Souls of brothers and sisters who will be servant of 'devel' by practicing same-sex merriage. Because it is completly devel's sprit . He is acting against the normal merriage ! It is pollution to our chilldren who wants to practice what is being practiced in their Society. Through time we will hear also so many shamfull news as our Civilized Socity started to warmly welcome such devel's behavings.

    Those who are created to be lost eternaly are already lost in the World as they closed their eyes, ears, and hearts not to be advised towards God's mercy !

    August 9, 2010 at 11:45 pm | Reply
  324. VANDY

    God is He who instituted marriage. He created male and female to reproduce and replenish the earth. And by the way He is not an author of confusion but perfect in all His ways. Marriage is union between a male and female and even animals abide by this. What can we say then, are hens and cocks more intelegent than humans. If not why then have we become so foolish in our actions. Same sex marriage is a SINFUL ACT.
    For those who dont believe in God, let us reason together 1+1=2 and not 1. Marriage is for procreation. The sodomites(gays) cannot reproduce. God is a loving and mercyful Father and can reject none that cometh unto Him in repentance. Gays outside there God is still waiting for you to come unto Him. He knows you and your feelings and much more than you can imagin. Dont delay your salvation. Come and you will be embraced and cared for. Put your cares in His hands and He will put His peace into your heart. Come, I say come. God bless you.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:51 pm | Reply
  325. Sam

    If we think scientifically that gay's are born genetically are made gays . Then we don't have what to discuss but if we take as a option that a gay is made just by hes one independent decision than we might elaborate a bit. But in the end we all know that future of this world dont depends on gays how they think or how they live or something else but on wars. Less war if its possible good be a better point rather that taking as an important a gay marriage issue

    August 9, 2010 at 11:54 pm | Reply
  326. nathan

    Marriage should belong to religions and their institutions.

    Governments, meanwhile, should not be involved with marriage, but rather should only offer civil unions. These civil unions should be blind to gender and orientation.

    Simple. Now you guys have nothing to argue about.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:54 pm | Reply
  327. Valter

    Marriage? That' s no marriage, just a farce .

    August 9, 2010 at 11:54 pm | Reply
  328. cm

    Christians: Please don't take advice from your imaginary friends so seriously.

    When you can rationally prove that god etc exist then start quoting religion in a rational argument.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:55 pm | Reply
  329. Kiwi

    I've never a civilised country so consumed and divided over such a silly issue as gay marriage. Grow up and join the real world. Just because you're a religious wingnut does not give you the right to tell other people how to live their lives.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:55 pm | Reply
  330. David

    I am for marriage for everyone of legal age. Religion should have no bearing on the legal definition of a marriage and should not be part of the conversation. It appears that majority religious groups are still trying to control political power. One of the greatest aspects of this country's founding is the freedom from religious persecution. It is only a matter of time before it will be legalized.

    August 9, 2010 at 11:58 pm | Reply
  331. People

    I believe that people who make a big fuss about it have nothing better to do in thier lives.

    It's not a bad thing. People get use to it the world is changing

    August 10, 2010 at 12:09 am | Reply
  332. jagu

    Gay Marriage,Should be ban and People doing it should be given treatment for the sickness. Even Animal do not do these,Thus We as a Human Beings,With a very high inteligence,Should never entertain this tought. All majjor religion prohibit this act.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:12 am | Reply
  333. Sodom & Gommorah

    Welcome to the institution'

    August 10, 2010 at 12:15 am | Reply
  334. Bill Jacoby

    How can anyone be opposed to same sex marriage? The longevity record of us heterosexuals is about 40%. We have no foot to stand on and the gay and lesbians are not hurting anyone by legalizing their union. Go for it folks.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:17 am | Reply
  335. Matthew

    I am pro-family, and homosexual connections have no place in family. Strike down the law, or strike down the supreme court.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:18 am | Reply
  336. Silver

    Gay people have a huge problem with negative self-image. They think being able to marry in society will label them normal and that it is somehow going to change reality. And then there are the liberal politicians who manipulate social order so as to win favor from gay voters and other liberals.

    Heterosexual couples who don't plan to bear children or have a family do very well living together outside of marriages. This whole issue is a prime example of distortions inauthentic people can inflict on society out of selfishness. I think very few people in the West believe in anything bigger than they are. They grab whatever they can grab; and don't care about consequences. This is what I think about gay marriage – reckless selfish indulgence.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:22 am | Reply
  337. Tea Neff

    Between a man and a woman and nothing more. Outside of it...is not honored by God.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:24 am | Reply
  338. Mike

    Most protests of gay marriage seem to becoming from the religious right. While I understand that two people of the same sex being married may be in conflict with the beliefs of various religions, that is not sufficient reason to deny anyone their rights. The United States is not a theocracy, and just because someone's religious text (e.g. the Bible) defines marriage, that text and the U.S. Constitution are not one in the same. The moment that we begin confusing our Constitutional rights and privileges with laws and commandments of a religion, we provide an open avenue for discrimination. Our country was founded on the basis of freedom, and those freedoms are extended to every citizen, regardless of their orientation.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:31 am | Reply
  339. fanta

    REvolting ! Disturbed, Deranged, un American, Un civilized and sick !

    August 10, 2010 at 12:32 am | Reply
  340. David

    I am all for every sex everything except in what comes to adoption, at least for now.

    I do not think we are yet aware of the implications of bringing up a child in an envrionment in which both parents are of the same sex. I am not saying that this should never happen or cannot happen, I do believe that it will and must happen, but before we introduce such a change in society, culture, humanity, we must understand how this will influence the world as we know it.

    I never thought twice about supporting gay marriage, even though I was raised as a roman catholic and happen to be heterosexual, but I strongly urge everyone to take it easy in the matter of raising children, that is simply the core of our existance.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:34 am | Reply
  341. Sup Fellas

    The church is about to be defeated, it will only take one more lifetime, a generation, that`s it.

    if the church wish to continue it`s power it should begin to think about nuclear warfare and how to exterminate a big portion of the human race and subject the smaller portion to it`s doctrine, unless so it`s done, religion goes bye bye.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:40 am | Reply
  342. Tea Neff

    And oh...it may be hot an issue now, and people do what they do anyway regardless if it's wrong or right in the eyes of GOd...and so the "gay marriage" becomes legal, eventually "normal" to anyone...what's next? I can marry my dog? Hey, it's my right too, yes? Ahh...sick world! No wonder God is allowing the world we already destroyed to melt , and maybe to melt for good. Why not, we think of nothing but ourselves, our rights, our freedoms, our all. We even treat the world we live in as there to use, and abuse. That's exactly what we humans do...abuse everything, even abuse God's kindness, God's forgiveness, God's love. No room for nothing but ourselves...that's the bottomline there...OUR SELFISH SELVES. People prefers to take than to give. Gay marriage is no different.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:43 am | Reply
  343. Johnnyr51

    "let's get real"?? Marriage, according to the homophobic right wing Christian orthodoxy exists only for a man and a woman. How can they conjure up that fallacy from a book (Bible) that preaches love and forgiveness?? I am astonished that the mentally depleted angry zealots
    in this world have so much say so in the affairs of the "rest of us". It has been pointed out over and over again in this forum that if your
    definition of marriage is based on the one word – "procreation" from the Bible that sort of defines marriage, then every menopausal, infertile, sterile or "disinterested in children" hetero-sexual person in the country wouldn't be allowed to marry. If it is based on Leviticus's seeming homophobia then also slavery should be legalized and stoning your adulterous wife should be too. The outrage i feel at the Prop 8 supporters is their "hidden agenda" against gays which is no different in nature and outcome than the burning of witches and the gassing of Jews. It's hatred, it's UNlove. it's fear and ignorance. It has nothing to do with the Bible.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:45 am | Reply
  344. David. C

    Homosexuality is just NOT natural. I am totally against it. Observe the old history and we find that homosexuality brings God's wrath to people. Cities that got ruined and destroyed instantly were all heavily involved in homosexuality. Pompeii is one of them!

    August 10, 2010 at 12:46 am | Reply
  345. Peter Odendaal

    It is absurd to deny same sex marriages in this day and age. Have we not progressed at all in this so called "en-lightened" age? Same sex marriages have been legal in South Africa for more than a decade, and it has certainly not led to the breakdown of the traditional "family" Same sex marriages will always remain a minority , just the same as the LGBT grouping , so why do heterosexual people feel threatened? When ais the world going to wake up and concentrate on the real issues that are facing our planet instead of wasting time with endless arguments about trivial matters?
    Peter , Namibia

    August 10, 2010 at 12:47 am | Reply
  346. Cesarino Cavazzola

    A gay is a person who needs the understanding of those who are not gay.But a gay person must realize he /she is not normal .Even in the animal world can not be found a norrmal gay union :it is abnormal nature.Marriage as such is the union betweena man and a woman.The union between two men or two wemen shouldn't be cald marriage.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:51 am | Reply
  347. David

    Gay people wanting to marry is similar to gay men wanting to dress, walk and talk like women. For some reason they want to pretend to be someone else, as if what they are is not enough.

    Have your relationships by all means. Just don't call it something it is not, and thereby cheapen an institution that is already under seige.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:52 am | Reply
  348. chris

    let the gay be gay but dont allow marriage because marriage came from religion and in every religion its says.. its not good to be homosexual or to do the same sex what would god say about marriage then,,

    August 10, 2010 at 12:54 am | Reply
  349. Ken

    It's very simple: If a country wants to have equal rights for all people, it must make marriage possible for people of the same sex, or ban marriage for everybody. Many Americans will never get this, mainly because they are brainwashed by conservative media. For Christians: one of the main things Jesus Christ tried to tell us, was that everybody is equal, and so should have equal rights. If he lived today, he would be ashamed of his believers, discriminating groups of people. And people, please don't be scared of things like "It will get into your life" and "If we accept smame-sex marriage, we should repeal any age limits on marriage and allow adults to marry children/teens as well". We Dutch people had same-sex marriage as the first country in the world, and now Canada and 7 countries in Europe have legalized same-sex marriage, and it didn't cause any problem. The USA would be a very weird country, if legalizing same-sex marriage would cause problems into your life and would lead to pedophile marriage between adults and children.

    August 10, 2010 at 12:57 am | Reply
  350. Lilian Hynes

    Forget about the Constitution. What does God think of this? Why did He make our bodies differently? This goes directly against His plan for us. America, America bring God back into every facet of your being. Know that God is real and He is watching.
    Do you think Jesus would ask His father to forgive us for we know not what we do? I think we know we are working contrary to God's commands and though He is a forgiving God, we must turn to Him and ask for his mercy.
    There is no way this could be right in His sight.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:00 am | Reply
  351. Ryan

    @Lawrence , or @anyone else who wishes to hide behind the Bible or religious reasons that either (a) gay marriage is an abomination or (b) homosexuality is contrary to the Bible's word...

    Let me remind you of a brief essay written about 10 years ago to Dr. Laura Schlessinger after she claimed the same thing:

    Dear Dr. Laura:

    Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination ... End of debate.

    I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

    1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

    2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

    3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

    4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

    5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

    6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

    7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

    8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

    9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

    10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

    I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help.

    Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:01 am | Reply
  352. Ken

    Haha, i'm imagining what those conservative religious people are thinking. "Same-sex marriage should not be allowed. Jesus said that in the bible and so its true.". 2 guys that are loving each other can't marry because some other people that have nothing to do with these guys believe in by the church made up lies based on the big fairytale book called the bible.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:03 am | Reply

    I am 51 year old federal employee, and gay. I have lived all my life as a law abiding citizen, and have paid all my taxes. Then why cant I have the same protection under the law as an heterosexual person. Why cant the person I decided to live together for the rest of my life, and that I will take care of him,,, and him take care of me, cant have the same priviliges as an heterosexual couple. Why cant he have Social Security benefits, why cant he be included in my health insurance, why in order to be able to recieve my inheritance in case I died first, we would have to spent money on lawyers and legal papers? WHY? WHY?

    If those who oppose the right of gays to be able to marry do it under religious grounds, saying that the most americans are "christians" I ask; so If by chance in the future America becomes a Muslim country, you would not mind to have Muslims beliefs imposed on to you because the most americans ara Muslims?

    If you oppose on grounds of "defending" marriage; I ask you; then why dont you propose to prohibit "DIVORCE", because the biggest enemy of marriages is DIVORCE.

    Let us have the same rights as you, the same way we have the same responsibilities....

    August 10, 2010 at 1:07 am | Reply
  354. Summer Sun

    I am in favor of homosexuals having the same rights as heterosexuals. Gays should have the right to legalize their unions or however they want to call it. To me, marriage implies a religious act and maybe that's why some people are against gays marrying, even though it's supposed to be all about rights (separation of church and state). So let's call it civil unions and allow them the same benefits as any other married couple.

    People ask why homosexuals want to marry. Let's see, if your partner were in a life or death situation at the hospital, you wouldn't even be allowed to visit him or her because you wouldn't be considered family. If you two lived in a property owned by one of you and that person died, you could find yourself homeless. I could go on and on about all the benefits married couples enjoy that gays do not have access to. Why should they be discriminated against if they too pay taxes and contribute to society as any other person?

    I am for recognition of same sex relationships through some kind of legal binding document that offers them the same benefits as any other straight person. Religion should not play a part in any of this. It's all about the rights that our Constitution is supposed to uphold.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:08 am | Reply
  355. Cocopuf

    Gay marriage is but another step that our society is continuing to decay morally and Spiritually; starting from the judges in the highest court of the land who are spiritually bankrupt on downward. "In God We Trust", is today, a hypocritical statement. It should say "In Satan We Trust" because that is exactly what is happening.

    To be gay is a lifestyle that is totally disgusting and quite obvious an unnatural behavior. Just think about it ... And to allow gays to adopt children is an even bigger sin because you are corrupting a child into thinking that to be gay is okay and that there is no God. YOU KNOW very well that it is NOT okay. So, don't be willingly ignorant on the day we all face judgment.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:08 am | Reply
  356. Cocopuf

    "Your Comments Awaiting Moderation" means you want to compromise on the truth.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:11 am | Reply
  357. Ed Gilbert

    Why all the fuss?

    In Canada same sex couples are able to marry from coast to coast to coast!!

    As far as I can tell the country hasn't gone to hell in a basket just yet.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:20 am | Reply
  358. april

    i am in favor of civil unions being provided as the only legally recognized government option for all, straight or gay. for those who want religion, they can additionally get "married" at the church of their choice.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:29 am | Reply
  359. Roland Mullin

    Homosexuality is a "chosen' lifestyle and not genetic.There is no scientific proof one is born gay,that is a "LIE".So therefor gay marrage should not be allowed anywhere in the world.Gay's and Lesbians have gotten away with this lie for way to long and we as citizens have to stop this world wide lie.Gay marrage should be outlawed every where and Homosexuality should be defined as a "MENTAL DISEASE" as it was years ago...

    August 10, 2010 at 1:41 am | Reply
  360. Jamster23

    i live in an African Country and of late we too have been debating this issue but in our case 99.9% of the population is against same sex marriage or any other same sex relationship. Yeah i know most people will say keep the Bible and the Quoran in the closet, but i am really happy i come from a deeply religious country be it christianity or islam.A question to all gays who should procreate for u to adopt.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:51 am | Reply
  361. Guy

    I take solace of the fact that all people opposed to gay marriage will eventually rot along with their hateful beliefs. In a century there may be some of your hatefulness left but it will be far out weighed. Pray that God ends the world... It won't coincidentally won't happen in your lifetime.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:56 am | Reply
  362. Kyle

    Gay Mafia Strikes again! Next thing you people will want to marry dogs, cats, horses, computer simulations, aliens? Slippery slope for our human race, because a vague passage probably translated incorrectly told me so!

    August 10, 2010 at 1:59 am | Reply
  363. John

    Much a'do about nothing. If you are solid in a permanent, monogamous, heterosexual relationship why should you even care? As Alfred E Newman was often quoted .. "What, me worry?".

    August 10, 2010 at 2:03 am | Reply
  364. Jon Kenney

    Can adults legally marry children then? Where will the line be drawn? What will equal protection under the law encompass in the final analysis?

    August 10, 2010 at 2:10 am | Reply
  365. hallie

    100% in favor

    August 10, 2010 at 2:10 am | Reply
  366. Merle Terlesky

    Marriage and the origin of it has forever been between a man and a woman. If homosexuals want to live together then do so, but please don't call it marriage, because it is not. It ruins the meaning and God ordained sanctity of marriage.

    August 10, 2010 at 2:11 am | Reply
  367. Frank Mountbatton

    There is a universal law in nature that positivity and negativity are attracted to one another, and then produce something new. In a way it is the same with man and woman. Human beings with their imperfections and sin, through their creativity and freedom, can bring about distortions to that ideal and law. It is therefore that homosexual marriages are harmful and even dangerous for the future, for the people involved, but also for the society. Let`s therefore focus on making and propagating good marriages and ideal families between man and woman.
    The fact that people may pay tax doesn`t mean they have a right to do as they like in public life.

    August 10, 2010 at 2:12 am | Reply
  368. Nancy

    People have their own right to choose what they want to do in terms of their marriage. It's true that the parenting might be a controversial issue once homosexual people get married. Also gay marriage may trigger the violation of religious concern. However, those worries and concerns can not be viewed as solid reasons that prevent people from getting married. After all, it is a personal choice of freedom. People have to be responsible for themselves in life no matter what comes to an end, and nobody else get any right to say anything.

    August 10, 2010 at 2:12 am | Reply
  369. Nathan

    I truly believe that Lady Gaga is in fact an man by the name of Simon Hendricks of East Fishkill, NY and currently has 4 outstanding warrants for his arrest by the state of New York and Dutchess County for lewd conduct and sexual performance with a minor under the age of 15.

    August 10, 2010 at 2:22 am | Reply
  370. Brian

    It's great for me – just tied the knot in Ontario, Canada a month ago after 15 years with my partner. What has changed as a result you say? I go to straight weddings and they reference us as role models. Cost to the country/province/city – none – in fact they made money from the license and tax revenues. As for religion, it played no part in the 6 weddings I have attended (5 hetero plus me) in the last year, none of them had a priest, or took place in a church ... so I'm kind of missing the God connection – what does it have to do with my commitment to another human?

    The word "marriage" is a human construct, and as with all languages, the meanings of words morph over time, based upon the environmental context.

    August 10, 2010 at 2:24 am | Reply
  371. Ray

    Despite what church leaders say, marriage has nothing to do with religion. The proof is that someone who doesn't follow any religion can get married.

    I suppose it is up to the Church (or any religious institution) to choose to allow or disallow people in a same-sex marriage to join their organization. But I fail to see how the State can successfully regulate it or why would the Church care about same-sex couples who aren't even following their religion.

    There would be less conflict in this world if people just mind their own business...

    August 10, 2010 at 2:28 am | Reply
  372. Elliot

    If the U.S. constitution guarantees equality for everyone, then of course everyone be should be allowed to marry. It seems ironic that a lot of the people who are against it are the same ones who wave the flag and proclaim their undying fealty to the nation and the documents that represent its essence. How a gay marriage can affect their own marriage is beyond me. If they hate gay people so much they should encourage them to get married since most marriages end in bitterness and misery.

    August 10, 2010 at 2:36 am | Reply
  373. Jeff Jr.

    The approval of same-sex marriage represents evolution and signalizes respect to humans rights. In addition, it bring us the perpective of break prejudices, a sort shout to conservative voices that your customs are ancient and they fit not in the current world.
    USA need to choose the right way to set justice.

    From Brazil

    August 10, 2010 at 2:37 am | Reply
  374. Muhammad

    Thank GOD . In my religion we dispose of gay people from a tall building or a tall mountain I believe.
    You people shoudl be ashamed of yourselfes. And the people that say put the bible in the closet should taka a close look at it first * even after its changes trough time– and throw away marriage to because that is where marriage came from. RELIGION.

    NO GAY FOR ME and alhamdoo LILLAH I am Muslim.
    Wallahee walk across my way and I will dispose of you in a religious manner.

    Oh by the way ... Iam a REVERT to the true religion of GOD. ISLAM ..
    And yes I am form Georgia * COLUMBUS GEORGIA

    August 10, 2010 at 2:50 am | Reply
  375. Eduardo Gonzalez

    Ugh... just leave marriage (gay or straight) up to the churches. Let them determine who can marry according to their little books of magic and just give civil unions to everyone with all the rights given by today's state-given "marriage". Why is this still an issue? Just don't "marry" anyone. Leave marriage to the religious.

    You can't even say that "the Church" prohibits gay marriage, because some of them actually accept gay couples. You can't even agree among yourselves about which interpretations should be given to your books of mumbo-jumbo. Religion poisons everything.

    August 10, 2010 at 2:59 am | Reply
  376. Adam

    I am just sick of people trying to use religion as an excuse. The bible more often supports slavery and woman abuse than it speaks against homosexuality.
    For instance "However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46)
    So how can people use something like Leviticus against homosexuals without also supporting slavery? It just doesn't make any sense. No matter how you look at it they either support slavery or admit that not all of the Bible is right. There is not way around that. I still can't believe this arguement isn't used more....

    August 10, 2010 at 7:07 am | Reply
  377. Bryan Conner

    I think that the problem is that there needs to be a distinction made between being married in a church and being legally married. I think that the US citizens should be allowed a vote deciding if it is permissible for same sex people to be legally married in the eyes of the government. And, it should be up to the members of the church to decide if a couple should be allowed to be married in that church. If the church does not want to acknowledge a couple as being married, then that is their right. The benefit of being legally, by the government, married does not involve the church. And the benefit of being married in a church does not involve the government. Keep them separated!

    August 10, 2010 at 7:34 am | Reply
  378. Chip Rosenthal

    I really can't add a whole lot that others have not said, but it helps to be reminded of points as you go through all of this.

    Our government is not a religious body. We have separation of church and state. The church grants the title of "married" to those who are wed there, but it is not legal on it's own. Marriage is a contract, of governmental structure, granting a status that joins two people together for legal benefits they cannot have separately. As a legal contract, the moral implications are irrelevant. (And I'm saying this as a Christian) Further, the law promises equal treatment under the law. Being "different" is not a reason to suspend that law on an individual case or segment of the population. That, covering my thoughts on the legal issue, is enough.

    On the religious issue, since I'm Christian, I will address it from that standpoint. (I have no real knowledge of other faiths, so cannot address them) Of all the things that are said about homosexuality in the Bible, almost nothing is said following the birth of Christ. the few references there are are today being debated by the most wondrous minds in the scholarly world. The consensus? It has not been reached. Even as we are fuming over this "problem", scholars are still debating it. Prior to the birth of Jesus Christ, the most used verses in the Hebrew Testament seem to appear with some other interesting things...like divorced people remarrying becoming adulterers, burning sacrifices to God, not suffering to live those who aren't like minded to the Hebrew Peoples, etc., etc., etc. So we don't have any clear cut answer to be found in this area of thought.

    Last, the scientific evidence...supports homosexuality as a normal part of nature, occurring in certain percentages of the populations of many diverse species, including human-kind. however, that is really sexuality, not emotional interaction and ties. But the evidence supports the FACT that true homosexuality in human beings is hard-wired into the brain. Not only is the sexual attraction for same sex interaction, but the emotional response that becomes what we all call love is also the same. Familial love is one thing, but life partnering love is another, and is hard-wired into the same brain. this, then, prevents the issue from being one of a choice, but is, instead, one naturally occurring in humans. Thus, since it is in fact normal in humans, then it is not wrong in and of itself.

    Where does this leave us? In my (humble) opinion, it leaves us trying to decide an issue based on science, nature, nurture, and core religious (almost) apathy, but founded in love, on the one hand, and a disregard for all of those things with hatred and ignorance thrown in for good measure on the other. But, what do I know?

    August 10, 2010 at 12:34 pm | Reply
  379. Mindaugas

    That is not right as many others things are not right on this planet.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:30 pm | Reply
  380. macarter

    It matter's not what we think about same sex marriage. We must consider the thoughts of the Most High God, who are spoken in His holy word by the prophets and apostles through the Holy Spirit . Very bluntly they say it is an abomination unto the LORD. Don't get it twisted, God said it and that settles it. Whether you believe or not. At the time of our departure individually or collectively you can't and will not be able to say I did not know.

    August 10, 2010 at 1:49 pm | Reply
  381. Dave

    @Frank Mountbatten - regarding your comment about positives and negatives being attracted as a matter of natural law, and it being the same for men and women ... just a reminder that there are attractive forces in nature that exist between objects of no particular charge or polarity (e.g., gravity), as well as those between neutral and positive charges (the strong force that holds nucleii together ... no negatives involved at all). Given that the strong force is often considered to be the strongest (hence the name), maybe that should be your model for how people couple ...

    August 10, 2010 at 4:18 pm | Reply
  382. Abiesi Sampson

    I think is the most sinful act in the world. I think is the work of the devil
    Anyone who believes in Christ should resist from that act. is satanic

    August 10, 2010 at 5:09 pm | Reply
  383. Jim

    AGAIN! BIble quotes are the basis for so many of the arguments here....the bIble, the Torah and the Koran were all interpertations and were compled over many years and centuries. Interpertation, personal slant and bias have suredly crept into these works, If you are so bent on quoting the Bible and living by it will some one give me an answer how the human race was procreated by Adam and Eve, who had Cain and Abel........the Bible is a collection of works not a factual book. Anyone who blindly follows anything and religion is the main focus here are fools. You have to understand where it was written, what the circumstances were and how they adapt to modern times. Everyone deserves the same rights under our constitution whethe straight or gay. The arguments about marrying your dog make me laugh....I feel sorry for the dog. marriage and entering into a life long ( hopefully) committment will enable all people the legal protections that everyone deserves to be part of under our constitution. Why are peo0ple opposed to granting rights to others when it does no harm to anyone.???

    August 10, 2010 at 5:18 pm | Reply
  384. Mike B

    This boils down to a few basic issues:

    a. Live and let live.

    If you're opposed to gay marriage on religious grounds, then fine...you don't need to accept it on a personal basis – no more than you need to accept an Islamic, Buddhist, or Atheist marriage. But you do need to accept that you live in America where everyone has the unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness...and if a gay couples chooses to spend the rest of their life together, it shouldn't concern or threaten you.

    b. Everyday difficulties.

    Everyday law around the world uses the term marriage when granting certain legal rights...everything from social security to hospital visitation rights and more. It needs called be called marriage so gay couples can legally exercise the same basic rights you do. It doesn't matter if you accept it personally as marriage; however, a gay tax paying patriotic American citizen shouldn't be denied basic civil spousal rights that you'd demand...right?

    Imagine you're in a foreign country that doesn't recognize Christian marriage and your spouse has a stroke and is in a coma. An urgent medical decision needs to be made; but you're told you have no say in the matter because your marriage isn't recognized legally.

    c. Politics

    Politicians use this to distract from positions on issues that might not be popular with their base. You might get your anti-gay marriage candidate elected without realizing you elected a pro-gun control republican who supports a tax hike.

    So...can anyone give me a good non-religious reason why gay people shouldn't have their commitment to a life partner legally recognized?

    August 10, 2010 at 6:05 pm | Reply
  385. Marcos

    If we allow this kind of marriage we will destroy our own society.

    August 10, 2010 at 7:05 pm | Reply
  386. Gerry

    ALL FACTORS BEING EQUAL, children do best when raised by their biological mother & father who are in a stable loving marriage.

    The role of "Mother" & "Father" are so gender specific that our language and our culture "Lock in" those labels. Do you know any same sex couples with children where one is referred to as "Mother" and the other as "Father"? Isn't it without exception, "Heather has two mommies" or "Danny has two Daddies"? Why do you think that is? Isn't it because each sex makes a distinct and unique contribution that can't be assumed by the opposite sex and our language as well as our culture affirm that truth, a truth even the LGBT community doesn't deny.

    If you don't consider the rights and well-being of children same sex marriage sounds ok, after all it is between two consenting adults. On the other hand if you exclude the harmed party you can justify almost any policy.

    Think about this in relation to race. White segregationist held their policies were good for them, and they were! They simply refused to acknowledge how those policies harmed others. When the conversation turned away from the segregationist's narcissistic obsession with their "rights"(It is all & only about me!) to how those policies & rights harmed blacks the country took action to limit those "rights". SSM supporters ask married heterosexuals how does SSM burden or harm your heterosexual marriage. Wrong question. The question is how does SSM burden or harm children?
    While heterosexual marriage or SSM can’t guarantee a healthy family in addition to sharing all the liabilities of heterosexual marriage SSM can offer no guarantee because it structurally is incomplete, missing either a mother or a father.
    What burden or harm does same sex marriage place upon children? Just answer these questions.
    As males grow up who do they learn to be a man, husband, father from?

    As females grow up who do they learn to be a woman, wife, mother from?

    If it is your position that children can learn these things from opposite sex role models do you have any idea how that would work?

    Isn't it your experience in the common culture that single gender parents actually will seek out opposite sex role models for their children? Why do you think they are doing that?

    While Judge Walker mentions children he never makes the connection between children and marriage. Every time Walker mentions marriage in his decision just insert the word "heterosexual" before it and you will have the correct historical usage of the word marriage. For all of Judge Walker's discussion of gender roles and how they have changed he misses what hasn't changed, marriage is a union of the genders, male & female. In all the thousands of years and all the changes in roles and statuses there has been one constant, marriage always was a union of the two genders.

    That the LGBT community doesn't think about kids a lot is understandable, Gay sex, by nature, isn't pro-creative. If gay couples want children they have to actively do something different. Heterosexual sex though is procreative by nature If heterosexual couples want children all they do is, let nature take it's course. Heterosexuals have to actively intervene if they don't want children which is one of the reasons why when heterosexuals want to get married they aren't asked if they are going to have children. In biology function follows form so the State is satisfied with having the two forms, male & female, present in the marriage. If Male & Female have sex the possibility is they are going to have children. In fact most heterosexuals have life goals of marriage and children.
    Is the same true for the LGBT community? Statistics say "No". Having and raising Children is a heterosexual value not a homosexual one. Marriage historically has been based upon that value, it serves well 97% of the population. Why seek to base marriage on homosexual values that deny children their basic rights?

    I would like to appear on the program. I live in torrance, ca. usa

    August 10, 2010 at 9:34 pm | Reply
  387. Robbin

    Anyone who is not gay and cares about blocking whether they get married needs to seriously put more energy into something that really matters. Go volunteer to help someone somewhere, these non-issues won't seem like such a big deal to you.

    August 11, 2010 at 2:41 am | Reply
  388. Ryan McVey

    Historically it has been in the interest of Conservative and religious groups to prevent forward movement of the evolution of our society.

    They futilely fought to deny equal rights for women, equal rights for African Americans, and now (it should be no surprise) they fight against equal rights for homosexuals.

    They put their Book on a pedestal, while they pick and choose from it what to believe and practice. The lessons of love acceptance, and tolerance... no, thats not what I have been reading here. What I have been reading here is fear, hate and ignorance.

    When it comes to religion, I worry not of what society says about me because I will only be judged in the eyes of God. After all it is God's job to Judge, not religions, and most definitely not yours. Those of you quoting the bible, please remember that when It comes to Law, religion has no place and all should be treated equal; that part is not up for debate.

    BTW, ignorance lost is battle to deny women and African Americans rights, and its only a matter of time before justice trumps to ensure the rights of homosexuals as well. We claim victory in these historic battles because, despite the man written verses you quote out of context, God is on our side; and thats what scares you. Your hate and intolerance only proves us right.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:37 am | Reply

    Its quite time that human beings realise that God created them so distinct compared to other animals; you have the heart, mind,well developed than a cow's,never has it ever been documented any where in the world history and current affairs, where cattle of the same sex mating,
    so gay activists the world over you should not belittle yourselves that much,rather draw your attention and energies to world's threats like global warming,AIDs,hunger,corruption for a better world.

    August 11, 2010 at 7:18 am | Reply
  390. Michael L.

    The anti-gay religious people are using the Bible to defend their prejudices and keep every LGBT a second class citizen. I don't see them campaigning to ban divorce and shell fish for food. I also don't see them pushing for a law to kill women who aren't virgins when they get married. All of those things are in the Bible. They're hypocrites because they betray the Bible and the Constitution, yet they call themselves great American Christians. What ever happened to Jesus' commandment to love one another?

    The LGBT community is full of law abiding, patriotic, and tax paying citizens, yet we're forced to the back of the bus. We are entitled to the same equal protection under the law as everyone else. I'm furious that our politicians, who mostly have been to law school, decide to ignore our Fourteenth Amendment.

    August 11, 2010 at 6:27 pm | Reply
  391. Bayano

    I will like to married my dog as my second wife, then adopt my cat as my son; it my constitutional right

    August 11, 2010 at 8:46 pm | Reply
  392. Bayano

    How far are people willing to go? Rehabilitation is the key word.

    August 11, 2010 at 9:12 pm | Reply
  393. Bayano

    Nature started it; humans call marriage, other animal's call it ??? or gay, why do humans think they can always break the laws of nature without consequencies. Some might say nature was wrong from the beginning

    August 11, 2010 at 9:29 pm | Reply
  394. Scott Gray

    The issue seems to be:
    1: Many note that there is a legal right of contract which until recently has been allowed only to some citizens of age (heterosexuals of the age of majority), and which has been denied to others (homosexuals of the age of majority). The right to enter into this contract carries certain legal advantages (tax, probate court, legal rights and obligations in courts of law, etcetera etcetera). These people look to right this iniquity, and allow gay marriage.
    2: Others look to the social and religious connotation of marriage. And a large subset of those people are from a culture and/or religious background that finds gay marriage anathema. (Likewise there are some other aspects of marriage under the law that some groups find questionable or wrong in the institution of marriage - such as no-fault divorce in some states.)

    The answer seems simple to me. Get government *out* of marriage. Period. No civil unions. No survivor benefits. Nothing. Nada. There may be some serious rethinking about aspects of our legal climate in the process, but it should be doable. Then, some people will be able to happily claim "we're married" while other people claim "no you're not!" - and neither group will be deemed "right" by the state; people can decide for themselves how to define marriage (since they are clearly going to anyway).

    Barring getting the government out of marriage, the only other real alternative in a nation founded on equality before the law, is to allow access to the marriage contract to any person legally allowed to sign a contract.

    August 12, 2010 at 3:54 am | Reply
  395. Scott Gray

    Bayano: That is a red herring. Marriage is a legal contract. Obviously it can only serve that function when both parties are capable of agreeing to a contract.

    August 12, 2010 at 3:56 am | Reply
  396. Scott Gray


    As an ethnically Jewish atheist, I always find it odd how often Christians like to pick and choose from Leviticus. (But, then I often find it odd how many people who claim to be religious have read less of their own books than I have.)

    Your theology, at it's heart, centers around the Christ. Your churches claim that he brought a *new* covenant to replace the old.

    But if you actually find the God of the Torah to be more illuminating and appeal to you more, I'd suggest this: The Torah and old stories show over and over again how God *learns*morality*from*man*!!! Consider how Abraham convinces God to change his mind about Admah and Amorah!

    You can't have it both ways. You can't claim that "God is by definition the author of morality" *and* point to the Torah is infallible on God's morality - precisely because the Torah shows us that God *changes*his*mind* on ethical questions. (If you don't believe that this is the theology of Judaism, read about abbi Levi Yitzhak of Berdichev - a Rabbi who brought God to court and *remained* loved and respected by the community after the case was over!)

    August 12, 2010 at 4:06 am | Reply
  397. s.v. ost

    ctw, thank you for doing a show on this topic. these comments show how important this is. civil rights are a battle field and always will be...
    if you read these comments you get the feeling that people living in different centuries are talking to each other. uncanny...

    August 12, 2010 at 8:12 am | Reply
  398. Andrew

    I am definitely IN FAVOR of gay marriage ! and all of you who recall god to help you and you say that our world will be destroyed because of that, its time for you to wake up. Keep in mind that when you wanted to get married, you didnt have to ask for anyone's permission. It is the same in our case. I do not have to ask for the permission of anyone, i have the same rights as you, either you like it or not. And if some people dont like to see gay people or lesbians expressing their love in public, then you can lock yourself at home or move to the Middle East or Africa and live with people of your mentality! If two str8 people can kiss and hug in public, then gay people can do so as well! same with marriage. Gay people are not 2nd class citizens and if we need to fight for our rights, we will do so!

    August 12, 2010 at 3:38 pm | Reply
  399. separate yet equal is still wrong....

    So, I watched this play out on a friends facebook page and my friend, I believe, said it best:

    "marriage is not a religious word. if you look it up, you will find that the primary definition is about a social institution with a legal impact, that may or may not be marked with a religious ceremony. in fact, there is not a single... definition of the word that is exclusively religious. here's a link: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/marriage

    marriage is a civil word, with a civil impact (and historically it always has been. 1200 years before the first religious scriptures – torah – dealt with marriage the code of hammurabi laid down civil regulation to address it).

    your proposed solution of "separate but equal" was not right with the black/white issues in our past, nor is it right with the gay/straight issues in our present. and make no mistake, the solution you propose is exactly the same as separate but equal.

    as for judicial overreach, the federal judge did no such thing. the federal judge ruled that the "wishes of the people" in this case are uncostitutional. that is exactly why we have a federal court system, and the federal judge was 100% within his federal rights to rule. the US Constitution superceeds State's rights. every time.

    hooray for the federal judge in this case, and hooray for the people who are being oppressed and won't stand for it.

    I disagree with the assessment that marriage has always held a religious connotation. i offer the fact that a "marriage" is not legal even when performed by a member of the clergy until the participants sign the leg...ally binding document as evidence. That legally binding document is called a marriage license. a marriage license has nothing to do with religion. while i know that many people believe that marriage is religious (they tend to be the religious people in my experience), the way marriage is treated by our country is not religious at all. it is civil. the pope himself could perform a marriage ceremony, but it isn't actually a marriage in the United States of America unless the participants sign a legal, non religious document.

    The idea of eliminating the word marriage from the law is a really good one, and would certainly eliminate the issues illustrated. however, i think the very same people who are fighting so hard to define marriage as between a man and a woman will fight just as hard to keep the word marriage in the law. the word is what is important to them, changing the law to eliminate the word would likely run into opposition. just my opinion.

    as for marriage in the Constitution, you are of course correct...it is not there. What is there is the 14th Ammendment, which guarantees everyone equal protection under the law. Prop 8 clearly violates this, as it awards certain rights and protections to one group while keeping them from another. That is not equal protection, so the law was struck down.

    The States have the right to make any law they choose, so long as that law does not violate the rights of the individual under our Constitution. When a law is passed by a state that violates the rights of an individual, that party can seek recourse in the federal judicial system. the federal judicial system will undertake to determine if the law violates the individual rights, and if the law is found to do so it will be overturned. Even if lots of people don't like it.

    This is an outtake from the decision: ""The evidence shows that, by every available metric, opposite-sex couples are not better than their same-sex counterparts; instead, as partners, parents and citizens, opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples are equal. Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause because it does not treat them equally." It would seem that the decision is on firm constitutional ground.

    August 12, 2010 at 8:59 pm | Reply
  400. Remi Ajayi

    Same sex marriage is abberation repulsive and an anticlimax in the so called advanced society.God did not make any mistake in creating males and females in all living organisms,even in low organisms only male and female mate same sex.
    Marriage is the beginning of the end for the human race.

    August 12, 2010 at 9:23 pm | Reply
  401. Andrew

    "Homophobia is the beginning and the end of human race".. thats more correct !

    August 13, 2010 at 7:22 am | Reply
  402. P.O. Nwaogu

    The problem is in the terminology ‘marriage’ being applied to what the gays are doing. Marriage relationship has at its background begetting of children even though at times there might be childless marriages but it is a contract between a man and woman to live as husband and wife. Marriage can only be legitimate when a male marries a female. Therefore ‘marriage’ between same sexes is ludicrous. Who among the two will be a husband and who the wife when the two are of the same sex? Please invent another appellation for what the gays are doing and leave us alone. What the gays call marriage and civil authorities are legalizing it is not marriage and it will never be. Governments supporting gay marriages are really going berserk!

    August 16, 2010 at 2:14 pm | Reply
  403. vivianac

    for me, whether homosexual or not, are people who have rights like everyone else, besides being rejected by many people they don´t to be rejected by the church too . might not be welcomed by many people, and I don´t to support this in a 100%, but if are couples getting married, is because they really love each other, and probably they will have more respect and understanding for each other.
    some people are born in that way and is not their fault. to have to accept the fact should not be easy, imagine the feel that you´ll have to face a world full of prejudice and homophobic, knowing they can not speak quietly because they can be punished for a violent ay, surely you wouldn´t like that.
    marriage is a right of every citizen regardless of sex, and is something which many people are fighting to be legalized in most countries, Colombia is one of the countries that similarly as in other, parades have been demanding this right and make it a legal marriage to same-sex and probably ir go to be really soon.

    August 21, 2010 at 6:24 pm | Reply
  404. SergioR

    I think that same-sex marriage is against religion and traditional, the marriage is the formation of a family, in a normal family is a man and a woman, mom and dad, homosexuals can't have children naturally, and whether the adopted children's education would not be normal, I have nothing against that they are homosexual but I do not agree with same-sex marriage, in Colombia senators have submitted law projects asking the approval of same-sex marriage but until now have rejected on several occasions

    September 2, 2010 at 10:39 pm | Reply

Post a comment


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.