Across nation, gay advocates protest marriage ban

This is only the beginning of forth coming civil disobedience! Gay Marriage is only the starting point of the newly energized liberal agenda to expand their base of militant fringe groups. It is just another rallying point to get new life into all kinds of protest. Issues of race have been pretty quiet up until this election. We have been getting along without much ado until this election. Bill Clinton is a racist? Where did that come from? You save the race baiting for running against those mean-spirited Republicans. Ok to bash white Christians but god forbid we go after any other ethnic groups. Boy do I feel good about electing a Black President. The world now knows that we are a great inclusive group of people. No more White guilt. We can elect a Black man with no experience and feel good about it. We don’t even know if he’s got a real birth certificate. Doesn’t matter. Constitution is only a piece of paper that we can change to suit mood with the right (Left) judges. We can go after Palin with gusto. White Christian, non Ivy League schools and god forbid she’s pro choice. Only problem is she’s for the wrong pro choice. She elected to keep her child. I always wondered why you can abort an innocent child but if you have one that is 15 and you know without a doubt that this is a monster child that will do harm to society, you should be able to abort it. This would be a good idea. Boy would that be an issue that we can come out and protest. We can have bake sales to get funds to go to Washington to protest in front of the Capitol. Get on the Drive By Liberal Media who would be supporting our cause and we would be able to raise lot’s of cash to help support our favorite Liberal candidate. Lots of wacko groups can get inspired to do the same. Fun times are here again. The Republicans should be this creative.

What is the civil right that the protesters are claiming they're being denied? Laws and statutes enacted and enforced across this land make all sorts of definitions and standardizations all the time, some that not everyone agrees with. Nevertheless, with the recent exception of gay marriage, the courts generally adhere to the legislative intent of these state laws and statutes. Denying any member of any group the right to marry a member of the opposite gender would be a denial of equal protection under the law. For example, denying a member of one race from marrying a member of another of the opposite gender. That's not the case here. What these groups are trying to do is to bypass the legislative and constitutional processes and get the courts to enforce a very radical rewrite of existing law as a convenience to them. That is undemocratic --- or to use a term that the radicals apply liberally to everyone else who disagree with them, "fascist".

The Gay agenda already is removing Mom and Dad from all text books. They are spreading HIV sexual botulism throughout the Nation. The Gay's at the Red Cross have applied to the FDA to permit Gays to give blood. Gays are now violently attacking churches. They are intimidating and intolerant of people who have different world views. The Consequences of giving in to this societal destroying Gay agenda will affect the security of our country as the Democrat/Socialist/Communist/Islamic party will introduce hate speech laws next year which will destroy free speech in our country. Who is qualified to determine what words are hate? The Gays? People will be thrown in jail if they try verbally to defend their liberties. This is not about just marriage folks it’s about societal freedom from moral corruption

GAYS RECRUIT NOT REPRODUCE,SIN IS SIN,HOMOSEXUALITY IS SIN

Hatred and lies from the Mormon church scaring people to deny others their rights swayed votes. Sorry to diappoint those who think we are "recruited" but we are born this way. Sin is eating shellfish..an abomination in the bible, as is not donating all your worldly possessions to the poor, preaching condemnation or hatred of others, women wearing pants and other man-looking clothes, and not keeping the sabbath or stoning your wife if she is unfaithful. Church membership, as reported in the Washington Times is down and for a reason. People are getting educated and away from these unintelligent and uneducated indoctrinated by fear mob.

Oh, brother, here we go again... let's blame a tiny religious minority, the Mormons, for everything. I wonder what other tiny religious minority got blamed for everything in 1930s Europe, as part of a radical militant group's lust for power? And here's another conceit by the radicals: that the people are too "unintelligent and uneducated" to decide for themselves a fundamental question about an institution, marriage, that's the bedrock of society. The rationale then goes, "Unelected, godless judges are the ones best entitled to make these calls." In a democracy, there must be checks and balances. Therefore, activist judges are no more qualified to render a judgment on something like the definition of marriage than they were in another judicial outrage, the 1857 Dred Scott Decision where the Supreme Court held that a slave is the property of the master. That decision resolved nothing, and split asunder this nation. Just like these other stupid decisions have and shall by our current group of overreaching, arrogant judicial tyrants. That, I might add, is not the Mormons' fault, or any other church's.

Ya know, my Jewish ancestors were driven from Portugal after they were deinied their culture, religion and even their name. Some group in power said they were not equal. Then there's Hitler when everyone in Germany turned their head and watched masses die because they were not like them. My issue is nNot just the Mormons, my friend, but any fool who takes words from the bible literally. The Catholic Church and Jimmy Swaggert helped. When people start defending discrimination based on the bible then they are really showing how stupid and indoctrinated they are. Hey how about banning divorce and then my "friends" like Phyllis Burgess(the cross lady from here in PS) who is divorced can moan the hypocritical importance of preserving the sanctity of marriage. Like the Washington Times reported membership in churches is way down...Think people are getting the message and the dinosaurs are passing on.

To TyinPS It really sounds like you've got an issue with Mormons and people who believe in the Bible then. What is your movement going to do about them? Censor them and shout them down just because you believe you know better. There will always be collectively more of them than there are of you. My guess is that your ultimate goal is to force any religious group to become as the Episcopal Church --- lots of ritual with little substance. How have you been discriminated against? Have you been forbidden from marrying a member of the opposite sex? If so, then the law is not being applied equitably and you have a case. If not, you have not been discriminated against. You're simply not getting the answer you demand for a special interpersonal arrangement never before recognized in any successful civilization. Aside from your group's interests, why should America redefine marriage in this unprecedented way to mean man on man or woman on woman? What legal, economic, educational, or sociological benefits are realized to the nation as a whole by making a special change to marriage from the long-recognized definition of lifetime bond between a man and a woman? These questions must be answered in an open forum. You're logic is flawed. It seems to go like this: if there is divorce, then all marriages are not perfect. If all marriages are not perfect all of the time, then the institution is flawed. If it is flawed, then you or any group should be allowed to redefine in any way to suit your proclivities. By your logic, if at any point, the reality falls any where remotely short of the ideal, your group considers that justification to destroy or warp the whole thing. For example, by your reasoning, if the police periodically violate the Constitution with torture and unlawful searches and seizures, then the Constitution must be flawed. Therefore, that document must and can be redefined in any way a group sees fit. That, of course, is preposterous. Your rejoicing in declining church membership seems odd to me. There are thousands of rich and successful human non-Christian cultures and civilizations all across the globe that do not and never have had gay marriage. You would think that, if Christianity was the only barrier to gay marriage, it would be extremely prevalent in these parts of the world. The development of human societies has consistently found a better way --- marriage, the lifelong bond of a man and a woman. Other arrangements went, by natural selection, extinct. So I do not agree that, if it were possible, wiping out Christianity will make your militant group's aims possible in the long run. Eventually, over time, even if enacted, after the following slow societal degeneration and collapse, gay marriage would eventually run its course, another social experiment on the scrap heap of human history.

Jaeger, What I have a problem with are people who deny others their civil rights because they are not the right color gender or sexual preference. How would you feel if you or your loved ones were treated that way, or you were told that someone has voted your marriage invalid? or did not have the right to marry? Yet, you were required to pay the taxes to support that? Look to the left and look to the right and within your own family. We are there. Earlier here in history similar things were said about blacks, latinos and women and interracial marriage. Where they trying to redefine the state laws that took this civil right away from them. No. As Americans they were ENTITLED to it.In the future there will be more Latinos and blacks in the US than whites. Watch out. Soon the votes may be turned against you. I and many of my friends have been denied the civil right to marry those we love or have had those marriages voided by "popular" vote. Our rights to social security, pension transfer, medical coverage and adoption have been killed many places. Since when are civil rights a votable issue? We are not asking for a redefinition of anything, just the right of two mature, tax paying adults to marry. If you don't want to marry someone of the same sex...don't. We have no problem with that or with your churches that won't marry us. What did our nation have to gain by freeing the slaves? Do you see in the "Pledge Allegance" where it says "liberty and freedom just for heterosexuals? No. You are trying to make it specific to your misinterpreted archaic religious indoctrinated beliefs. Flawed? Marriage? well what does that have to say about the sanctity arguement? Some have called homosexuality Gods way of controlling overpopulation. It has existed throughout history and is not going away. We have contributed much to society through history. We are, and will continue to be, born this way. Get used to it. Denying civil rights to idividuals can only last so long. The south held slavery sacred to the point of war. Funny how they seem to vote the same way on this. You can only repress people so long until they revolt. I think the time has come.Sorry that is not what you endorse, but it's now here and it's not going away. There will continue to be a plague on this country until it is resolved.Count on it.

To TyinPs A couple of things: 1) "In the future there will be more Latinos and blacks in the US than whites...Soon the votes may be turned against you." Your premise is that there is a correlation between race, ethnicity, and sympathy for your cause. The demographics of the votes in Florida, Arizona, and California prove otherwise. Moreover, you don't know me so don't stereotype people just because they disagree with your goals. 2) The redefinition of marriage failed because your movement uses undemocratic methods, litigation, to force society to do something without precedent. Americans don't like being dictated to. Use of the legislative process takes longer, but would have proven more enduring. Litigation resulted in the people acting when threatened by a rogue court making a bad ruling, ultimately resulting in a legal limbo. That was unfortunate but should have been foreseeable. Our political system is based on popular sovereignty. 3) "We have no problem with that or with your churches that won't marry us. What did our nation have to gain by freeing the slaves?" Actually, your group isn't not any more tolerant than anyone else. Your activists tried to shut down the Boy Scouts in New Jersey because of that private group's internal policies regarding homosexuals as scout leaders. They then successfully forced the disbandment of the Catholic Church's adoption agency in Massachussets when that agency declined to violate the Catholic faith and begin placing children with gay couples. Your group, without parental permission, had one of its teachers take a class of first graders in San Fran to a gay wedding. You're in self-deception --- your group is not about live and let live. It is about conquest and compulsion. Regarding the slavery issue, what the nation gained was greater productivity, and it eliminated a great moral wrong. The abolitionists were people who believed in moral absolutes, but you ridicule those type of people. 4)"You can only repress people so long until they revolt...it's now here and it's not going away. There will continue to be a plague on this country until it is resolved..." I'm not seeing how you've been repressed. You're free to demonstrate, chant slogans, and associate with whomever you like. I have seen your group engage in its own repression of those with whom you disagree. I do not know if "plague" refers to your movement. That was probably written in an emotional state. I wouldn't have chosen that term, personally. Threatening people with plagues only will make them fight whatever it is that's threatening them even harder, instead of listening.