Gay unions gaining global favor

Ah, and as we chip away at the family unit of a mother and father who bear the future generation of America, so we threaten the potential of the nation... not to mention the rise in STDs among gay men, threatening, therefore, not just the potential, but also the health of the nation. And yet, some call it a 'victory'? Nay, it is a tragedy... a great tragedy.

A country can not survive unrestricted abortions, same-sex marriage, an illegal immigrant invasion, or a Kenyan born president with a forged birth certificate.

Wow. They call this a victory. A victory for who? The courts cannot trump the voice of the people. Gay activist talk as if they have won when they don't realize that it is the people and their representatives who make the law. Besides that, it really doesn't matter what the law is; there are somethings higher than the law. To name one, morality. Our country is tearing itself apart trying to conform to this tolerance mentality that we think is so important. Sorry, there has to be limits; you can't just go around saying everything is ok. There are morals an principles that a society needs in order to function properly. It is the family that makes the core foundation of our society. If we take that away in the name of tolerance we will have stripped ourselves of our fundation and it will only be a matter of time until we will see the damage (If we can't already)Does it really make sense to allow homosexuals the privilege of marriage? What ramificatins will a policy such as this do to other areas of the law (such as special property rights for married couples that have from the common law been defined as a unity of a man and a woman)? Are we not a independent nation with our own laws and our own society? So shouldn't we look at our own interests and ignore what the Europeans are doing?

I wonder about something. Is marriage a right or a privilege? If it is either, the why are gay people denied the same rights and privileges as everyone else? Isn't that what America is about, Fair and equal? I seem to remember a term "Fair and equal justice under the law" Has that phrase been phased out? It seems that the American public isn't afraid of green. Money, that is. Seems Americans aren't afraid to deal with gays when it comes to goods & services. I don't see car dealers turning away business. I don't see states not collecting taxes and providing goods and services to the public. It seems green is the color no one denies. However, people see red when it comes to gay marraige. Why is that? Do you not think we're your neighbors, colleagues, church attendees, etc.? We live and work right beside you, spend money like you do, pay taxes like you do, yet, you do not wish to give us what you enjoy. How interesting! Is love only a heterosexual emotion? I do not believe there is an exclusitivity there. However, I am not the one to judge. That's right, you are.

You say potato. I say po-tah-to.. What the numbskulls in California call "gay marriage" is called sodomy in some jurisdictions and "civil unions" in others. Big deal! My Bible says it's an abomination in the sight of God no matter what the laws say.

Onlyonevoice, this isn't about denying rights to gays. There are plenty of laws already for civil unions which give the exact same rights to gays. This is about redefining the definition of marriage and then putting a state seal of approval on it which most people don't want. That's like someone calling a horse a cat when in fact it isn't. What's next, a man marrying a dog or a woman marrying her father or a man marrying 20 women? Once we open that pandora's box and allow gay marriage then be prepared for the unintended consequences.

Fairness and equality...These are to be considered when making a policy decision, but there are many more. Another thing to be considered is common sense. Does it make sense to allow homosexuals to marry? Marriage is something special.Plus, there's a whole lot more than love to marriage. Gays are always trying to convince us that they love each other. That may be possible, but that doesn't mean you can get married. A lot of people love their pets, but does that mean they should be able to marry their pet? No. Also, what kind of stable home life is a family with two moms or two dads? There is also a higher break up rate among homosexuals, so there won't be any change in the divorce rate and the home lives of many more American children will be more screwed up than they already were. Onlyonevoice, of course people do business with gays. We all do, but there is a difference between doing business with people and agreeing with their lifestyle. Likewise, business makes the world go round, but most of us keep our personal beliefs and our politics separate from business. As an opinionated country we would have a hard time doing business with anyone if we were always looking into our associates' lifestyles (religious, political, or sexual beliefs). But we don't do that; that would be ridiculous. I deal with homosexuals everyday; I treat them just like anyone else. However, when it comes to the good of society, I know and good number of others also know that our society needs traditional families who are going to strengthen this country by bringing good kids into this world and providing a table home life. That's really what this is all about, the future of this country. Homosexual marriage has nothing to offer this country, but that is not the only reason why this isn't going to work. Whether we admit it or not we all know there is something wrong with the lifestyle and with the idea of homosexuality entering a realm of society that has always been protected as the union of one man and one woman. I suppose I could argue about this all day, but if we cannot understand that this is a moral issue and not a political issue then we'll just talk ourselves blue in the face. By the way, "Fair and equal justice under the law" is a nice saying and that you may have heard on Law and Order or seen on a courthouse or government building, but the law also protects its citizens from poor decision making and faulty reasoning. Thankfully it has done so in the majority of our states for over 200 years. I suppose the future is up to us.

Right on Tomc100!

Gays do have the same rights as everyone else. They are free to marry someone of the opposite sex just like anyone else.

Hehehe. Silly uneducated bigots are funny. Seeing how 50% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce (usually within the first 2 years), I’m not so sure the man/woman model is necessarily the best arrangement for children. If heteros can’t even save their own marriage, they clearly are in no position to say gay marriage is bad for children. You want to “protect” marriage? Get rid of divorce, infidelity, domestic violence, and those quickie Vegas marriages people like Britney Spears are having….instead of trying to prevent those who WANT to get married from marrying. Silly, silly bigots…when will you learn? Truth is: the vast majority of the EDUCATED people of society (from legal scholars to social scientists–AKA people who can think LOGICALLY) SUPPORT gay marriage/adoption. Survey after survey has shown that the higher the education level, the more supportive they are of gay rights (in other words, the dumber you are, the more anti-gay you’ll likely be). If conservative/religious/homophobic nuts would spend a little more time in school (and learn some SCIENCE and LOGIC) and less time sticking their noses into other people’s personal lives (which don’t affect them one bit), then they might earn some respect from those of us who are educated and civilized. Stopping gay marriage isn’t going to make gays go extinct, and it certainly isn’t going to stop them from having gay relationships and adopting/raising children. Get over it and start worrying about more important things in life (such as getting a college education). Yikes! NEXT!

Oh! Before I forget, consider this… The American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the World Health Organization, the American Counseling Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the Council on Child and Adolescent Health, the American Academy of Pediatrics and even the health ministries in Russia and China ALL say homosexuality is not a mental disorder, isn’t a choice, can’t be changed and trying to change it is harmful. Did I mention these are EDUCATED people/scientists who actually STUDY these issues? The American Psychological Association, the American Psychoanalytical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Anthropological Association ALL support gay marriage and submitted amicus briefs to the CA SUP CT in support of gay marriage there. Below is an excerpt from a academic article written by Lynn Wardle, law professor at BYU… ——– 39 STXLR 735 South Texas Law Review LEGAL CLAIMS FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE: EFFORTS TO LEGITIMATE A RETREAT June, 1998 (Approx. 27 pages) "...American law review literature has been inundated with articles advocating, supporting, and expressing sympathy for the legalization of same-sex marriage. [FN48] Between January 1990 and December 1995, seventy-two articles, notes, comments, and essays that significantly discussed same-sex marriage were published in law journals in the United States. Only one of those pieces opposed same-sex marriage and defended traditional heterosexual marriage; sixty-seven of those publications clearly advocated, supported or were sympathetic to legalization of same-sex marriage. [FN49] Likewise, a recent review of ninety law review articles, notes, comments and essays published in the past six years that discuss whether homosexual behavior of a parent or prospective parent should affect adoption, custody, visitation, and assisted procreation reveals that all of the law review pieces support homosexual parenting, and generally oppose any consideration by courts of homosexual behavior as a factor in parenting decisions; none are significantly critical or question the potential risks of homosexual parenting. [FN50] In the social sciences, the pro-same-sex-family-relations bias in the literature about equally pronounced. [FN51] Thus, the academic and professional literature thoroughly favors same-sex marriage and family initiatives..." --- Moral of the story? The dumber you are, the more anti-gay you'll likely be. NEXT!

This is our moment. This is the time we have all been waiting for. Let us tear down these walls of misunderstanding and replace them with meaningful intercourse. Finally, the liberal hordes can pull their collective intellect out of their collective hindquarters, reach across that great partisan divide and join their conservative inferiors in an honest attempt to solve two of the world's most pressing problems almost immediately. They need only wait until that great sucking sound is no longer audible to begin. Same-sex marriage has superseded abortion-on-demand as the leftist cause célèbre; conservatives, on the other hand, are preoccupied with practical matters and insist that we regain our energy independence posthaste. Let us come together - as it were - and synthesize our demands. Let us practice the art of compromise. Since they insist that theirs is a natural inclination, let us resolve to allow same-sex couples to marry, with the stipulation that they not procreate by means of heterosexual intervention or artificial insemination and that they not use condoms when engaged in sodomy, for all that they do and all that they be must come naturally. Then, not only will we see a reversal of the trend towards acculturation of heterosexuals in an increasingly homosexual world, but an increase in the rates of natural morbidity and mortality of homosexuals. Moreover, with the concomitant decrease in the use of condoms, there will be a commensurate increase in the volume of petroleum crude available for alternative consumption: it could be refined to produce gasoline or diesel fuel to power our Smart cars. Such a compromise would be a laudable accomplishment, for it would lay to rest the question of same-sex marriage while simultaneously lowering the price we pay per gallon at the fuel pump. Then and only then will same-sex and heterosexual couples be able to live happily ever after.

Meatballperson... So if the intellectuals say its okay for us to kill or physically injure someone who annoys us, it's okay. That seems to be the reasoning. By the way, name calling (the bigot comment) and trying (emphasis on trying) to belittle others with an assumed intellectual dominance are not charactersistics of a reasoned debate. That's something the "man on the street" aka the average person knows. Perhaps you could learn a thing or two by talking to him.

Oh my gosh! I just spent an hour refuting the argument of Meatballperson and when I returned from previewing my comments my entire entry was deleted. I'm stunned. What a waste of my time. Let me summarize in 4 sentences what I wrote in detail. Scientific study does not support the positions taken by the organizations mentioned by Meatballperson although you may find that hard to believe. The only group that is sticking strickly to the scientific studies is the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). What do they say? Homosexuality is a sexual addiction, not love. It is obsessive, compulsive and unhealthy (especially for males). They have a success rate for curing homosexuals with counseling of 33% about the same rate of success that you have with similar psychological disorders. The APA says it can't be done. You want the truth about homosexuality go to www.narth.com

ROTFLMAO! If you have to rely on NARTH for your "scientific studies," then you clearly have the education of a high schooler and the IQ of a chicken! Anyone with half a brain knows NARTH has zero credibility and is looked down upon by most of the scientific community. Anyone who relies on NARTH for their "scientific studies" doesn't deserve to be taken seriously. NEXT!