Ramen!

While I personally don't see marriage as a union between two people of the same gender, this is my opinion/belief and I have no wish to live in a society where my opinion or beliefs are forced on to those who believe otherwise.

I hope this remains a state issue, and the federal courts only involve themselves to ensure anyone has the right to enter into legal contract for the sames rights as marriage to anyone they chose.

Frankly I support Ron Paul's position, that marriage is an issue of the church and should have not have a place in government. (Ron also personally believes marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman)

This also means government can NEVER tell us what marriage means, since such subjective terms are defined by society. In the end, we are better off keeping such controversial things out of government and having instead a government that supports personal freedom and liberty.

Who Cares???

Less that 2% of the population .

Find something real and important to worry about.

I agree with you Greg... If homosexuals want to marry let them! The problem is not the 2% the problem is the right wing/religious fundamentalist croud that will always twist the facts to keep the truly important things out of the negociating table by brainwashing their followers.

Eventually we'll get past this issue here in the US...give it another decade or two and it will be a non-issue.

It's long past due that we offer equal right to all US citizens. Anything short makes us a 3rd rate country.

An old straight guy

Good, so can we finally put this controversy behind us and allow gay marriage? Can we please move on now to more pressing issues????

The easiest solution to the whole issue is to make a civil union necessary for any couple to enjoy the legal rights which are currently accorded to marriage. Everyone of whatever gender who wishes to be considered a couple go to the registry office, pay their fee and make an oath to the effect that they are a couple. Simple.

Now we define marriage as an entirely separate activity. (Remember the concept of the separation of church and state?) Marriage is achieved by a ceremony in a religious institution. If the religious institution wants to marry you and your partner, then you are all set. Pay the fees to the church or whatever and the marriage takes place. However a marriage in and of itself confers no legal rights, it is purely and only a religious ceremony.

If a particular church won't marry gays or people of different faiths or short people or whatever, then that would be their right according to their religious beliefs. However, the lack of a marriage ceremony in a church would not impede a couple of any sort from enjoying their legal rights as established by a civil union.

Easy solution. The legal aspects stay in the secular arena and the religious aspects stay in the religious arena. Hopefully that will make 99% of the population happy and as for the other 1%, who cares? LOL!

They want to get married , good busines for lawyers, with so many cases of divorce they will make good money, considering the high rate of divorce in USA I can't expect less in a same ser union. Good luck.

I'll ask here the same thing I ask every time, everywhere, this subject comes up, and have not once received an answer:

If gays were allowed to marry, who would be hurt / harmed / suffer a loss, and in what way?

Looks like we'll have to concentrate on that "flag burning" issue again.

Wow Mac, lots of misinformation...perhaps the reason you don't like those things is because you really have no clue. After all it is human nature to fear that which we do not understand. Luckily most people in the US take highschool physics courses and intro to biology to understand the principles you don't seem to grasp.

Apparently they didn't poll any heterosexual people!

mac "Why do you people think only religious people are against gay marriage?"

no, they are just the most vocal and spending the most money to keep gays from having equal rights.

"And why are they nut cases, because they don't believe a big rock existed from all time..."

no, because they live in a nation that exists on the principle that each person has liberty and freedom, to pursuit their own idea of "happiness"...and yet, here are quite a few "red blooded americans" clutching their bibles doing their best to infringe on other ADULTS personal freedoms. All the while claiming they are the ones being persecuted.

"and exploded from who knows what to create all types of things including round spheres and human life and the explosion somehow is still keep in perfect synchronization through the entire universe all by itself? Now THAT takes faith to believe."

not anymore than a guy who looks JUST LIKE YOU is sitting up in the sky, making it all happen with the twinkle of his nose, or point of his finger. i dont "believe" in science more than religion, I just think there's a lot more logic to it.

"I am not religious, but I think homosexuality is wrong and that evolution is the stupidest theory of all time."

good for you?

"And I couldn't care less who thinks I'm a homophobe, hater or whatever. I have an opinion, and I think it homosexuality is a terrible thing"

but why does that give you the right, nay...the desire, to keep gays from doing their gay thing? I think stupid people, like you, is a terrible thing...but im not out trying ot make laws, or enforce stupid laws, that prevent you from procreating or getting married, or even just existing...am I?

I'm shocked that the number is only 53%. Personally, I am all for same-sex marriage.

I'd like to take this opportunity to correct the Gallop "Double Speak" Gay Agenda Poll... Most Americans are opposed to same sex marriage...end of story.

Only 27% back multi-sex marriage, though, even though Arnold Schwartzenegger and The Newt came out in favor of it.

Hey Jherek Carnelian

I believe that your civil-union proposal would satisfy most 'ordinary' people and it avoids hi-jacking a word that most of us understand and perhaps do not want to redefine.

I have a few issues with it...........

I dont care about gays getting married........as long as it is called what it is.....legally...... Gay marriage ...

and then as a separate but exactly the same thing b/t man and a woman called a ............ marriage...........or a traditional marriage

Gay folks are fine with me ........ some are hilarious........ but i do not approve of political tactics being used to create indoctrination propaganda to influence kids or education/schools......

So, does this mean that the United States isn't really a "right-leaning" country, like the Republicans keep telling us?

Just when I start losing my faith in the intelligence of the people of this country, I logon and find out that the majority aren't stupid...the minority just seem to scream louder.

but why does that give you the right, nay...the desire, to keep gays from doing their gay thing? I think stupid people, like you, is a terrible thing...but im not out trying ot make laws, or enforce stupid laws, that prevent you from procreating or getting married, or even just existing...am I?

Umm, you had me until you started with the procreating banter! Man didn't decide that Gays and Lesbians couldn't procreate...Nature did! Now I'm sure there is some Gay mad scientist out there trying to figure a way that a male can inseminate another male through his arse hole and carry baby to term. Hell we try and play "God" every chance we get. However, until that happens...Be clear, noone is preventing them from impregnation!! Two people want to pass on their genetics...It must be a male sperm and female egg, PERIOD!

kpokeefe - ???? what are you talking about?

Im talking about PEOPLE PASSING LAWS, not god and nature.

By the way, 2 gay people can make babies.

@mac:

I am not religious, but I think homosexuality is wrong

OK, then, be the first to answer my question. In order to be "wrong," then something has to cause some harm, right? What harm does homosexuality (or gay marriage) cause?

Those who attend church less frequently showed more support than avid churchgoers for legal same-sex marriage
What about those who are religious who are homosexual? If they can accept that their faith has made it hard for some people in society to accept them for who they are, then those avid churchgoers should be able to accept that God has let them worship in "their" church. (I know a few homosexual individuals who do believe in God, btw.)
I'm all for it-I'm all for people who want to create a union, start a family, provide stable homes for children who need them (and don't get started on gay people "teaching" their kids to be gay, your kid is going to do what they want, eventually, regardless of your raising if you are a man & woman raising them.) Look at all the broken homes from heterosexual marriages! If someone wants to create a place to accept someone and take care of them when their own parents have not done so, then by all means, let them adopt and raise kids, as well, if they don't choose the surrogate route. I'm all for gay marriage and the rights to the partners that married heterosexual partners have.

Ok, this isn't necessary a republican versus democrat issue. If any of you has ever seen any of my posts, I'd consider myself tea party/republican.

But I'm fully supportive of gay marriage...and I'm pro-choice. I don't see how the constitution sets any parameters for the government to have any say in this....in fact, the constitution specifically separates church and state, therefore, the government has no constitutional authority to set any laws regarding this, with a couple exceptions.

The legal side of marriage is contractual. The government can oversee those contracts and decide legitimacy, but it has to be equal. To limit ones ability to enter into that contract because of race, sex or religion is discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Mac, while I may not think you are right, I do accept you have the right to believe whatever you want as long as it doesn't negatively affect others....that's something called freedom. To not accept anothers beliefs as correct is ok....but you do not have the right to dictate that to them anymore than they have the right to dictate yours.

@R Johnson-string-of-numbers:

I'd like to take this opportunity to correct the [Gallup] "Double Speak" Gay Agenda Poll... Most Americans are opposed to same sex marriage...end of story.

Let's see... Ignoring facts in favor of made-up pronouncements regarding what other people think. Employing needlessly inflammatory language to draw attention away from factual information and create hysteria with no basis in fact. Dismissing scientific data in favor of pronouncements supporting your position (stated as fact), and doing all the above in the service of taking other people's rights away for no remotely articulable reason. Let me guess: Republican?

Praise to thy Spaghetti Monster! >:)

All right, I'll make this quick. Yes, Gay folks should be treated as equals in every way. Not any different than being lefthanded vs. righthanded.

Sorry to hit and run, but I'm so aghast at Obama these past two days, that it's not easy to break from his unstoppable idiocy. So, there it is. Now back to the fray....

Hey Greg,

It's alot more than 2%. Try 10-12%.

It should come as no surprise that Republicans are holding fast to their view. They love BIG GOVERNMENT. LOVE IT, I tell you.

Something as deeply personal as marriage - whether between a man and a woman, two men, two women, or even a polygamous relationship - should be neither sanctioned nor approved by the government say those lefty liberals.

However, BIG GOVERNMENT Republicans know better. Government should be in your bedroom, for a woman BIG GOVERNMENT should be in your vagina, and for men - jeez, I don't even want to think about it.

Hey Republicans, I'd like to know how YOU know what's on the mind of God. Fortunately one of your spiritual brothers tells us the world is ending tomorrow, so I guess it doesn't matter.

I've really never put much thought into this issue...but I would like to know why a day's poll results should matter one bit.

A majority of Americans polled did not want the new "health care" law passed and it was passed despite that less than 50% support. There are dozens of bills passed by state and federal governments over the past couple of years that were not supported by any majorities, but were passed and signed into law despite the voters' rejection.

So why should the results of a poll matter at all on this topic ??? If poiticians were expected to vote based on poll results, then we would not need the politicians...we'd only have to respond to polls.

Hmmmm...maybe that's not a bad idea !

"The results are based on telephone interviews conducted May 5-8, 2011, with a random sample of 1,018 adults, ages 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. The results were weighted for various factors to give nationally representative numbers."

1,018 people from 50 states plus DC, that's about 20 people per state on average. The 2010 estimated population of the USA is 310 million (~75% over the age of 18 = about 232 million). So they call about 1 out of every 228,000 people to get a representative view of the USA's beliefs (that is provided you have a phone and they have your phone number). Of course this was also adjusted at the end to arrive at nationally representative numbers for this poll to discover nationally held beliefs.

"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp posts - for support rather than for illumination." ~Andrew Lang

Jessica,

Read your quote:

but im not out trying ot make laws, or enforce stupid laws, that prevent you from procreating or getting married, or even just existing...am I?

Nobody is passing laws preventing Gays from procreating! Nature prevents gays and lesians from procreating. PROCREATION is having sex with the intend of impregnation!

By the way, 2 gay people can make babies.

You are on crack! there is no fallopian tube with eggs and a womb up in a man's @!$%#. You can adopt or you can opt to have a woman carry the baby, but YOU CANNOT PROCREATE PENIS TO @!$%#, P-E-R-I-O-D! Go back to school and take a biology class!

I seriously question the validity of the pole. If I'm not mistaken, this would be the 1st time a majority of Americans favor same sex marriage, sorry I don't buy it. What suddenly changed? When I see several poles taken over a period of time all in agreement, then I'll believe. Till then, call me doubting Thomas.

I seriously question the validity of the pole.

So you're a lesbian?

I just loled in my pants Dave in NM...hilarious!!

Mac:

You're right, the Theory of Evolution is the stupidest theory of all time.

Surely it is true that an invisible guy in the sky on Monday created a great formless mass. Then on Tuesday, he kinda separated the sky from the dirt. On Wednesday, he made the beaches and plants. On Thursday, he made the sun, moon, and stars. On Friday,he made birds, fish, and other sea creatures. Then on Saturday he created land animals and lastly he made the greatest creation of all - Man. After that, I'm kinda surprised he only rested on Sunday. That's some hard work, and if it had been me, I'da just rolled a fattie and poured some nice wine - or just made it magically appear - and take a nice snooze and maybe take in a football game.

In Genesis, it says there were actually two creations of man - King James, you know. He spoke man into existence and he created man from clay. Hey, who's gonna quibble about the greatest invention of God and how he did it, right? I mean, come on, that Theory of Evolution thing is just the dumbest thing of all time.

The God thing is the real deal. That's believable fer sure, dude.

Next time we meet, I'll tell you about this little Jewish girl who was a virgin until the holy ghost got hold of her. She gave birth to a guy who could walk on water, raise the dead, and all kinds of cool stuff. I mean, that's like totally awesome and believable.

So, how'd you get Internet in your cave?

kpokefe

Man didn't decide that Gays and Lesbians couldn't procreate...Nature did! Now I'm sure there is some Gay mad scientist out there trying to figure a way that a male can inseminate another male .... Hell we try and play "God" every chance we get. However, until that happens...Be clear, noone is preventing them from impregnation!! Two people want to pass on their genetics...It must be a male sperm and female egg, PERIOD!

Temporarily a true statement, but your a little off base, and going to happen sooner than you think. The first same gender conceived children will be had by Lesbian couples. You should take a deep breath, and put down that cold beer or cup of coffee. (I don't want you to spill it on your lap). The inevitable march of science is about to make your head want to explode.

British scientists create artificial sperm from human stem cells

One day with advancements like this, one woman can donate her own stem cells and have Sperm created. Those sperm could then be used to fertilize the eggs of her partner. Viola, you are standing on the door step of having a Homosexual couple be able to reproduce and give birth.

While this research is being pioneered for the benefit of infertile males primarily, I'm sure you can see the relevance to another segment of the population.

Who cares what people do in the privacy of their home so long as its legal? I don't understand people who feel they need to push their values and beliefs on others. Live your own life and let people live theirs.

Temporarily a true statement, but your a little off base, and going to happen sooner than you think. The first same gender conceived children will be had by Lesbian couples. You should take a deep breath, and put down that cold beer or cup of coffee. (I don't want you to spill it on your lap). The inevitable march of science is about to make your head want to explode.

Of course, I alluded to that...Reread my ENTIRE post! Just because you can do it doesn't make it right! The Gay and Lesbian thing, to each his or her own. That crap has been around since the beginning of time. What people do behind closed doors is their business as long as it doesn't involve animals and children.

If I can genetically create a human being with two heads because we all know two heads are better than one (no pun intended) does it make sense? Also, if I can take my own stem cells and create a genetic twin for spare parts in the case of cancer, dementia or hip replacement (OHHH, that is coming too) is it moral and ethical to do so? If it isn't, who says that it isn't...The church? You? Me? WHO!

I don't agree. Sorry!!! But then again I am a Christian so I guess someone could have a problem with the life I chose!!!!!

Dave in NM, you got me their. I didn't even consider they're were to spellings for the word poll. I'll have two proof read my posts closer next time. ; )

Marriage is outdated. Instead of legalizing Gay Marriage we should do away with marriage, period. Then we will all be equal.

Once again, gays have come from behind!!!!!!

If we legalize gay marriage, what's next? Interracial marriage? Those crazy liberals...

tony wrote: "...but I would like to know why a day's poll results should matter one bit...A majority of Americans polled did not want the new "health care" law passed and it was passed despite that less than 50% support. "

No, no, no. You are probably one of those people who only listen to Faux news or right wing radio...because those were the ONLY people "reporting" that misrepresented number. The 54% "oppose" number that fox loved to tout included 15% that didn't like the bill because it DID NOT INCLUDE A PUBLIC OPTION. It didn't go far enough. Egad, how do these people get away with claiming they are a news organization. So, really, the majority were indeed for reform.

I don't agree. Sorry!!! But then again I am a Christian so I guess someone could have a problem with the life I chose!!!!!

whut the

nobody is trying to tell you how to live your life (except what you believe is god, but that is a different matter), what is upsetting people is religious groups telling people that they must live their lives the way religion dictates. (much like many muslim countries).

live your life as you believe that god intended, but don't try to bring your idea of what god wants into my government.

DaveNM.. You & I have a right to marry our 1st cousin. Is that ok with you? IF NOT, WHY not?

And, since when is it a scientific fact that same sex marriage is the norm for most. Again, as in the foolish global warming data, the numbers are cranked out to reflect the wishes of a deviant society...and that society now rules from the bench, ok?

Dave [in] NM.. You & I have a right to marry our 1st cousin[s]. Is that ok with you? IF NOT, WHY not?

It's moot for me, because my parents are both only children. As far as a moral dimension, there is very little evidence that reproduction between first cousins produces viable but defective offspring. There being negligible risk of actual harm, I don't have a problem with it. It's a social more that has been rendered vestigial by scientific understanding.

And, since when is it a scientific fact that same sex marriage is the norm for most[?]

Who said it was? Straw-man argument. Are you seriously looking for me to concede that straight people are in the majority? OK: we are. Point conceded.

Again, as in the foolish global warming data

Irrelevant attempt at a threadjack, but D- for gratuitous snark.

the numbers are cranked out to reflect the wishes of a deviant society...and that society now rules from the bench, ok?

Your tireless attempts to change the subject concluded (and your veiled attack on the poll's validity remaining unsupported), perhaps you will now be so kind as to answer my question:

What is the harm posed by homosexuality and/or gay marriage?

The only poll that counts is at the ballot box - the ballot poll.

A measley less than 5% of the entire American population agrees to gay marriage. That is the percentage of the population in the states that allow gay marriage. 5% is not statistically significant.

Gay marriage bills failed in HI and NY and NV. CA voted to change our constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

I wonder if "so-called" journalists ever get tired of being public relations/advertising executives instead.

And this just goes to show that EVERYONE LIES TO POLLSTERS.

A measley less than 5% of the entire American population agrees to gay marriage.

If you don't trust polls, how do you purport to know that?

A measley less than 5% of the entire American population agrees to gay marriage.

If you don't trust polls, how do you purport to know that?

Sorry Dave from NM,

That does not come from a poll. Some govt agency (census or?) has the official populations for the states. I added the populations of the states that allowed gay marriage and divided by the total population of the USA to determine the percentage of people in the USA that agree to gay marriage.

THE ONLY VALID POLL IS THE BALLOT BOX. HOW MANY STATES ALLOW GAY MARRIAGE? - 3 OR 4 - CT, MA, DC, IOWA? IE - if the citizens of a state do not vote for gay marriage, then they do not agree with gay marriage.

Less than 5% of the entire USA population has voted yes to gay marriage. Meanwhile, MAJOR HUGE STATES LIKE CA AND NY HAVE SAID NO TO GAY MARRIAGE. TX - THE OTHER LARGE STATE - TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE (because I don't pay attention) HAS NEVER PUT IT ON THE BALLOT. I wonder why (not really. it was a rhetorical question).

I hope this helps you to understand how I am correct in my analysis.

AND THAT EVERYONE LIES TO POLLSTERS.

sorry Karen, prop 8 barely passed, that is hardly a "measly 5%"

can't even come up with legitimate numbers without pulling a lie out of your butt.

Karen: Now that you've failed statistics class, perhaps YOU can tell us what harm gay marriage causes.

Dave, Dave, Dave, Dave, Dave:

I see you've not run into Karen In Los Angeles before. You've heard the expression "teachable moment" - well, Karen lives the "unteachable life".

Good ol' Karen in LA...Her logic is simple:

If a state has legalized gay marriage, 100% of it's residents are in favor of gay marriage.
If as state has not legalized gay marriage, 100% of it's residents are opposed to gay marriage.

Karen, you have lost this argument before. Constitutionality is NOT decided by a vote.

Why do you care?

Oh, and isn't the census a poll?

Ah, Karen in LA ... she's been a lawyer, she's been a cosmetologist, etc. She's been everything except a realist.

hey karen, if we were to have a vote that only people with an IQ above 120 (which would exclude you,btw) would be allowed to vote from now on, do you think the constitution would uphold that?

I mean, hey if I could spend a few tens of billions of dollars to convice people that it would be good for them to let "smart" people run the show...

just like religious groups spent billions of dollars to pass prop 8

Excuse me boys but allow me to correct you.

The BOTTOM LINE is the VOTE. Period.

The tiny, baby states that have agreed to gay marriage have some of the smallest populations.

The BOTTOM LINE is the VOTE. 29 STATES HAVE PASSED NO GAY MARRIAGE LAWS. That is the majority. If soooo many people are for gay marriage, how did it happen that 29 states have passed no gay marriage laws?

Further, NONE of the big states (CA, TX, NY) have passed gay marriage laws. In fact, in 2 states where the bill was introduced, THE BILLS DID NOT PASS.

In fact, we voted NO TWICE in CA.

So far, no one is challenging me that it never came up for a vote in TX, the second largest state.

You're just angry that you can't beat my logic so you have to attack me.

You never ran into someone who simply does not need your validation.

Karen, you have lost this argument before. Constitutionality is NOT decided by a vote.

YOU say I lost an argument? WHO CARES WHAT YOU SAY? WHO ARE YOU ANYWAY?

You are NOT a judge. Further, this is NOT a constitutional issue.

Marriage licenses are granted by the states, not the feds. In my state, our constitution says that marriage is between a man and a woman, and my state supreme court upheld that we Californians can define marriage in our constitution with our vote.

In a week or two, a federal judge is hearing how Judge Walker's (the gay federal judge that overturned Prop 8) decision should be thrown out because Walker should have recused himself from the case. I'm filing a brief on that topic because not only should Walker have recused himself, this challenge is bogus.

Being gay is not the same as being black. Per US Supreme Court decision in Maynard v Hill, marriage licenses are up to the states.

Further, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is reviewing the matter. That court does not have gay judges with an agenda and will follow the constitution and PRECEDENT of Maynard v. Hill. That IS the ONLY option.

Judge Walker's decision WILL BE OVERTURNED.

Finally, courts DO NOT MAKE LAW. Only the people and the legislature have that authority PER THE CONSTITUTION.

isn't the census a poll?

No. It's a count of the entire population NOT a sampling of a population which is contacted by pollsters like Gallup.

If some people don't participate in the census, they simply do not count.

sorry Karen, prop 8 barely passed, that is hardly a "measly 5%"

can't even come up with legitimate numbers without pulling a lie out of your butt.

Such language. It's definitely unprofessional.

I did not make up numbers and if you paid attention to what I said, you would realize I was talking about the whole country, NOT JUST CA.

Here is a link to the US Census Bureau.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html

It gives the population by state (even counties) and for the country. Add the populations in the states that have granted gay marriage (CA, IA, VT, DC, MA) and divide that number by the total population of the US. You will find it's less than 5%.

I already did this calculation so I won't do it again. But I did give you the tool to prove it to yourself if you don't believe me. I don't care if you believe me. I already know that I am correct.

PS - WE VOTED NO TO GAY MARRIAGE TWICE IN CA. PROP 8 PASSED BECAUSE WE DO NOT AGREE TO GAY MARRIAGE IN CA.

and at some point karen, it will be federally passed and no state will be allowed to discriminate against marriage equality. the highest percentages of people against are the old farts who want the good old days back, they will die off and the younger generation will do things the right way.

and at some point karen, it will be federally passed and no state will be allowed to discriminate against marriage equality

Sure it will and the cow jumped over the moon too. You have ZERO basis on which to make this statement. NOTHING supports this conclusion. Only in your mind, but your mind IS NOT the law.

there were people in iceland, england and spain that think the way you do, and guess what? legal there. and guess what else? civilization didn't end. not sure why you are the way you are, but being hateful arrogant and mean is not a pretty color on you or anyone else.

Karen: You still haven't addressed: 1. The fact that just because a bill doesn't pass, that doesn't mean that 100% of the population voted against it, or 2. What harm is caused by homosexuality or gay marriage.

While we're at it, perhaps you can explain how it's relevant that gays aren't "the same" as blacks. Oh, and also what could possibly motivate people to lie to pollsters and create the impression of support for something they oppose. And perhaps how it is that you count 100% of the populations of states that haven't voted on the issue as being firmly in the "against" camp.

If you just duck questions, keep repeating the same obviously flawed "logic" (while failing to rebut people's identification of the flaws) and repeat nonsense like "voting matters and what people think doesn't," you stand no chance of getting any credibility back. And if you have no credibility, why bother posting?

There is something either sick or lazy about going to a Family reunion to pick up chicks!

John and Dave

I do not need to answer those questions. Why is the sky blue? I don't care. It's blue. That's all that matters to me.

I don't care what they do in Europe or Canada. WE RAN SCREAMING FROM EUROPE AND ITS MONARCHIES OVER 200 YEARS AGO. Canada is still owned by the Queen. Why do you think QUEEN ELIZABETH'S representative opened the CANADIAN WINTER OLYMPICS? IT'S BECAUSE THE QUEEN IS THE BOSS IN CANADA.

We are AMERICANS. WE VOTE. THE ONLY POLLS THAT MATTER ARE AT THE BALLOT BOX. PERIOD.

I don't care what they do in Europe or Canada. WE RAN SCREAMING FROM EUROPE AND ITS MONARCHIES OVER 200 YEARS AGO.

Many of us refuse to even acknowledge any superiority of the European or EU in any meaningful way. As mentioned above - If Europe was so wonderful, why did - continuing to this day -, Why did so many leave the comfort, stability of Europe to take on the Wilderness in the New world?

Short answer, because the factions, infighting and centuries long feuding in Europe. Before there was Slavery in the United States, there were serfs, Royals, feudalism Castes and classes/classism in Europe. One of the first things that were removed, prevented in the formation of the United States was the renunciation of Perpetual, Hereditary governance. Royalty was banned by constitutional law.

Unfortunately, you can free the worker, but some will look back longingly at the idea of letting someone else do their thinking for them. Some folks are just not comfortable with a Mother, Father to tell them what is right, wrong. If you truely are an American, then you you should resist the notion that any self-elected person or institution can tell you how to run your life better than you can. Sure... freedom can be lonely, you are cut loose from the "herd" and vulnerable. But, if you accept the idea that citizenship is your ticket to belong to something greater, something you have a voice in shaping - then being an American is like belonging to a "Club" of immense power, which can tap into the collective wisdom of 300+ million minds. You are not alone - if you exercise your vote.

Its not about "you", its about US as a country and where we want to take this "experiment" in Representative Democracy. Quit looking back to the Old world for answers - if they actually had any, they would have solved most of the problems they still are going though today.

Let's see, if the majority had all the answers, and if the majority's vote counted, then blacks would not be allowed to vote. Chinese immigrants could not vote and could not get citizenship. Slavery would still be legal. Blacks and Whites would not be able to marry each other.

Obviously, we are not a democracy that does what the majority wants. Is that so bad?

While I absolutely do not agree with Karen's beliefs. She is correct that many states have voted and decided to not allow gay marriage. That doesn't make it right, but its fact.

Although it looks as though she is ignoring the trend that more and more people every year decide gay marriage isn't the be all end all of human existence.

If the trend continues, eventually gay marriage will be legal. Strictly looking at approval ratings for pro-gay marriage, you can't deny it.

Karen's 5% claim is also ridiculous. Yes if you add the populations in states that have passed pro-gay marriage laws, they add up to 5%. However she is discounting other states that allow various types of unions and states like CA where 6.5 million people voted for allowing gay marriage.

In fact only 13.5 million of about 35 million voted in CA. Therefore more than half of the people didn't vote at all.

Interestingly enough, the CA measure was separated by less than 5% of vote.

I came on here to type that exact same comment. Well said!

Agreed! about time the religious nutcase minority is exposed as such, but don't worry, the minority will still twist the facts (aided by the Infallible Faux Oracle) to state that they are the majority and keep legislation stalled.

Well, NY is VERY close to passing a bill, which combined with states having to recognize other states marriges will basically end the debate.

I swear, NY is the only state where democrats loosing the senate increases a gay marriage bills chances of passing; go figure...I do think we are still 2-4 votes short on the issue though, due to a few conservative democrats who will not vote yes.

Sooner or later, the NY senate will get the votes on the measure, and passing the assembly is a slam dunk. NY passing a Gay Marriage bill will basically end the debate once and for all. No wonder the crazys are investing tens of millions in lobbying money to try and kill it...

Yes, it's about time that we stop voting for these Republican do gooder moral crusaders... all in the name of big business.

They'll say ANYTHING to pander to the religious voters, and then turn around and skewer them and protect the rich.

The problem in this country are the Republicans, plain and simple. If you vote for them, YOU are also part of the problem.

makessensetome: Makes sense to me. Well said. +1

It's NOT a Democrat vs Republican thing though...it's a religious fundamentalist thing. I know plenty of those 28% pro-gay Republicans and I also have come across very devoutly religious Democrats (ie.... devout Catholics and Baptists) they believe homosexuality is a sin and don't think gays should be allowed to marry. THAT is how you have things like Prop 8 passing in CA, its one of the most solidly Democrat states in the country. Notice I'm specifically calling out fundamentalist religious people for causing most of this, NOT all people who are religious, there's a difference. There's also plenty of religious people that have evolved their religious beliefs along with changing society. I really wish people would quit trying to oversimplify issues to fit their own ideological us vs them mentalities.

As for whoever asked, "does that mean the US isn't right leaning?" it depends on the actual issue, on gay rights I think that answer is no, even though I already pointed out how that's not really a left vs right issue anyways, but for the sake of argument, ok, lets just say it is. However on fiscal policy and the belief that our govt should provide even more social services for all via taxation....you'll find a lot of people shifting right vs left on that topic. My 2 cents from where I'm sitting in a place that most of us like to call, the moderate middle.

It's just too bad that America is no longer a democracy, but a plutocratic oligarchy.

80% of Americans want to tax the rich, too.

Another witty comment about your president.......where do you come up with such remarks? They are such a riot

You just noticed that two years ago? Where were you before that, in a deep coma?

Brian, the "American people" used to support slavery, women not voting, Prohibition, and other out of date ideas. The "American people" tend to be pretty stupid when it comes to the rights of others.

I'm new to this same sex marriage debacle... For example, two guys get married...which guy gets the transplanted uterus? Or, is there no intention to perpetuate the species into the future?

And, what kind of future will it be, after-all?

We need a little Q&A here>>>

Did you perpetuate the future when you wanked this morning? I think not.. that argument is old and moot...

We already over populate this earth.. why do we need to keep adding to it exponentially?

What the American people support means nothing....

Well, that's what happens when you Republican voters continue to fall for the same garbage. Oh, they're anti-abortion? Well, then, I must vote for them. It matters not what ELSE is on their agenda... People need to stop being blind "religious" followers. Can't you Repub voters see that you're getting taken advantage of?

Yes, I did perpetuate the human race this morning.... And, we did "it" as intended and by design...

And, NO. The earth is not overpopulated, another myth you love to cling to.

I just finished reading Orwell's 1984... you same marriage folk would find pleasure in a society of "thought crime", "double speak" ...would you not?

makessense...

If you think about it a bit...don't you think there's more than a few Democrat voters have been "taken advantage of" by politicians, also ???

R...

The earth may not be "physically" overpopulated, as you state...but when one large sector of that population depends on the rest of the population to just about take care of it's every need, then something is not right...overpopulated or not.

And surely there is something not right about some sectors of this planet's population.

Ok, Tony... Here's a hypothetical... Assume same sex marrige really catches on, legal, and fully acceptible in our degenerate society... It becomes the "norm".

And, China decides we (the US) is ripe for the taking out the "degenerates; and they move in, because they need the space to expand the "world economy"... too far fetched for you?

R Johnson-1998028

I'm new to this same sex marriage debacle... For example, two guys get married...which guy gets the transplanted uterus? Or, is there no intention to perpetuate the species into the future?

Um, you do realize that legalizing gay marriage and forcing heterosexuals to marry same-sex spouses are two completely different things, right? No one is going to force you marry someone of your same gender. In fact, it won't affect you at all, just as your own marriage wouldn't affect them.

Clear on that now? Proceed...

So Johnson, since you think marriage should be predicated on the ability to reproduce, do you also think that women who have gone through menopause should not be allowed to legally marry?

Please show me when marriage was introduced that it was intended for same sex couples. I believe in equal rights, just find a different word

When it was introduced? Back when it was first introduced it was intended solely for one man and several women. It's been redefined a few times since then...

Toasty.. Shall I refer to you as the all knowing historical authority on marriage evolution? Yes, I guess some societies will continue to "redefine" or reshape our social moires until every human, and animal,has equal rights...Unfortunately, a society that cannot separate rights from responsibilities will ultimately fail.

Uh, how does an animal consent to marriage? A hoof or paw print on a marriage license?

Toasty, You (and your pride members) would surely vouch for them... it would essentially be legal in your domain.

MAKE MARRIAGE ILLEGAL. What good does it do? All we do is get married, get divorced, marry someone else. Why keep getting married? It's outdated.

I know two women, seperated from their husbands, dating someone else (one has been living with the guy for years). What's the point? Why have marriage in the first place?

Tony .... you are right in a way...but then you are referring to the civil state of marriage and not a true marriage put together by God binding two into one and that my friend will never be outdated.

If you talk about marriage by GOD.. well then.. you're talking a whole other story. Religion is NOT part of our government (Ideally)...

I think "God" would be disgusted all around with what people have done to "religion"....

Your interpretation doesn't make it the correct interpretation.

I don't think "Godly" marriages have ever been around. Most of the ancient marriage had to do with politics, land/property management or both. What has ever been put together by God? They've only been "blessed" by the church.

I've looked before, but I've never found any generic Tea Party policies against gay marriage - is there something I've missed? I realize there are individual candidates that are against this, but there are also Democrats opposed to this, and I certainly wouldn't say the Democratic party as a whole is against it.

In case you're curious, I went to the main Tea Party site, and here is an exert listing their goals: (and, no, I'm not a Tea Party person myself)

The Tea Party movement is a grassroots movement of millions of like-minded Americans from all backgrounds and political parties. Tea Party members share similar core principles supporting the United States Constitution as the Founders intended, such as:
• Limited federal government
• Individual freedoms
• Personal responsibility
• Free markets
• Returning political power to the states and the people

It's not so much the core goals of the Tea Party,;it's the fact the for whatever reason, the Tea Party seems to have attracted much of the radical fringe , who have added their own agendas.

I can see the fringe point..unfortunately, I think the left and right fringe both have way too much influence nowadays...

LMAO!! Ron, you said grassroots. Right! No more so than Obama's victory was grassroots.

Ron,

Anyone who uses the phrase "Tea Baggers" usually has the IQ lower than his/her shoe size - don't bother using facts.

Adam...you mean like the teabaggers who came up with that name for themselves until they realized what it meant in slang terminology?

http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/4/4/4/5/3/5/Proud-to-be-a-tea-bagger-13111604309.jpeg

Adam

So you also consider Rush Limbaugh to have an IQ lower than his shoe size? He was the one that first broadcast the use of the term.

Carianne, the TEA Party (Taxed Enough Already) did not call themselves teabaggers as you assert. That was a nickname given them by the all inclusive, open minded, everyones opinion counts, free speech, anything goes, liberals. Oh wait, those were the democrats of the 60's and 70's who are now extinct or nearly so. No Carianne, the radical left is every bit as toxic as those you decry on the far right. Only difference is those on the right have always held their beliefs, it the ones on the left who have sold their soul to now embrace what they once deplored.

I remember them calling themselves teabaggers way back in the beginning. I remember it distinctly because I laughed my ass off when I saw it. I continue to call them that because it's more fun than going by their old name, "christian conservatives."

Wow how bigoted are you, how can some Democrats be Christian Conservatives

Uh, they aren't.

wlee.. Toasty will accept "Deviant Democrats,,," it kinda goes with the scientific studies - includes "poll studies" - that have established the mental disorders they've inflicted on each other since about the mid-60's ...I should know, I was one at one time.

I'm heterosexual, but what what I can't understand is why people would care about who other people want to marry. Is it because of the legal benefits of being married? If so, then we should eliminate those benefits so they are no longer an issue. After all, marriage is primarily a religious thing, and in this country we're supposed to have separation of church and state.

If you are against same sex marriages for some other reason, then that's entirely your own problem.

I do not consider it a "problem" to be opposed to same sex marriage, if you cant as you say understand then clearly you need to read Darwin or the Bible - your choice

Of course, Michael Stipe (the singer for REM) who wrote the song you quote is gay - so clearly he was talking about something else. The world is changing - learn to live with it.

You're right, it is the end of the world as you know it. That world being discriminatory, of course.

Also, kind of ironic that you chose to quote a song fronted by an out and proud gay man, aka Michael Stipe.

And I never thought I'd see the day when so much rape and violence, use of words like "bull****" and "b*tch" would be used in primetime, when more money would go to wars over oil than to taking care of our own needs here. You probably never saw that day coming because you don't know any normal and decent gay people...though, undoubtedly, somewhere along the way some have perhaps cut your hair, waited on you in a restaurant, bank, taught your child or grandchild, played for your favorite team, is a cop on your beat, assisted you in a medical sense, has fought for your country, is a child of a relative or friend or, god forbid, voted for the same candidate you did. Sometimes ignorance is not bliss; it's just plain ignorance. By the way, what is the heterosexual divorce rate these days and how many abortions and single-parent families are there?

does everyone here realize that dogs are gay sometimes as are other species- sometimes as much at 10 or 15%.

Celtic the bible should NOT even enter into the conversation. That is a book that only SOME people believe in. The laws of our country are what we should go by and they say that ALL Americans are equal and should have equal rights.

As long as 2 adults are aware of what they're getting into and old enough to legally sign a marriage contract then they should be able to marry who they wish.

LOL, sz and Joe. Celtic 1 is going to have to throw out all his REM cd's now.

Common sense, unwad your panties ok. First I know many Gay people, my roommate in college was gay, wonderful guy great friend to this day. Second I know Michael Stipe is gay, its called irony. Geezz I thought gay folks were smart, oh well another myth busted

Gay people are just like you and everyone else, we can be smart, stupid, white black, red, brown, whatever. No need to believe myths; just deal with the world as it really is and you'll find it's actually pretty cool.

"Gay folks" are just like everyone else. some are smart; some are stupid. Some are conservative; some are liberal. Some are honest; some are not.

Congrats Celtic 1, you've managed to live long enough to see it.

No Celtic 1, the end of the world isn't until tomorrow.

After all, marriage is primarily a religious thing, and in this country we're supposed to have separation of church and state.

Correct. Besides, the US Constitution doesn't even mention marriage, so I'd argue that even recognizing marriage exists by the Federal Government is a blatent overreach of the Federal Government, as recogniation of marriage is clearly unconstitutional.

*waits and sees how many heads explode*

@bill-1260019

Does that mean that I can marry my gay dog if I want to? Or is that a different discussion?

Does that mean that I can marry my gay dog if I want to?

So, you want to make him your b*tch, do you? (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

Celtic,

It is not and probably wont be the norm. However, that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be allowed.

As others have mentioned, it shouldn't even be an issue. Equal rights is equal rights. Therefore if hetero people get certain advantages (tax breaks, etc) as a result of marriage, then you have to let gays "marry" and get those advantages as well.

This is coming from a libertarian who believes that you should be able to do just about anything you want as long as you aren't hurting other people.

Celtic, as you can tell from various remarks, your comment was interpreted with a sense of negativity against gay people ... equating gays as being "normal" with the end of the world. Glad you cleared that up, that you are in favor of gay rights.

"I never thought I would see the day where people would consider it 'normal' and acceptable for whites to marry blacks." - random quote from random guy around 40 years ago.

Legalize interracial marriage, Paul? What a pinko commie liberal extremist...

Yea right -

Sorry but "normal" is defined by the society we live in not a single individual.

Bill in Houston is obviously a closeted homosexual. It's ok Bill. Come out. We will accept you for who are.

I agree with Bill. So gay marriage is now normal. Glad we are in agreement, Bill.

But which "normal" are we to abide by Bill? Your "normal"? Or should we abide by the "normal" of the snake handlers? Or how about the "normal" of the Mormons? Or the "normal" of heavy metal fans? Or the "normal" of pensioners in Florida? Or the "normal" of marijuana users? Or the "normal" of Laotian immigrants?

The problem you see is that in a nation of over 300 million people, there are many, many, many different groups of people with very diverse concepts of what is "normal". Thus, it is not at all possible for the arrogant and intolerant to assume that their particular bigoted reality is "normal".

And, Bill,,,Is there a "normal" pedophile under consideration in your world of "normal"?

All of the descriptions of normal above have merit. When I think of normal, I think of what in a population is the usual, the ordinary or the most frequently observed (with thanks to Wikionary).

It then is left up to us to describe what "population" encompasses. We may be referring to the entire human race or we may be referring strictly to the residents of San Francisco. Our defintion of normal for these two populations could then be quite different.

To expand upon what I think is normal, I tend to gravitate toward what is the most frequently observed behavior of the human race for a particular activity - such as partnered relationships - and I believe the male-female relationship is the most common observed worldwide. I therefore consider it normal.

I believe the male-female relationship is the most common observed worldwide. I therefore consider it normal.

If your definition of "normal" is "most common", then sure, man-woman marriage is normal, just about worldwide, I expect.

But defining "normal" as "most common" is not what leads to discrimination. The problem comes from defining anything that is NOT "most common" as therefore "not normal", and then extending THAT to "abnormal", "undesirable,", and even "abhorrent".

Agreed howieCA.

But when something that is by my definition not normal, it can only be classified as undesirable or abhorrent when a person or a group interprets it as such. Such interpretations are then subject to acceptance or rejection by others.

The point is that normal and abnormal are subject to individual perceptions. There are those who strongly believe that homosexuality/same-sex marriage is abhorrent and undesirable just as there are those who think otherwise.

But when something that is by my definition not normal, it can only be classified as undesirable or abhorrent when a person or a group interprets it as such. Such interpretations are then subject to acceptance or rejection by others.

But when someone is discriminated against by people who say that what they do is abnormal, then continuing to call their behavior abnormal - even if all that is meant is "not most common" - actually *justifies* the discrimination, at least in the minds of those doing the discriminating. They will assume you agree with them that the uncommon behavior is actually wrong behavior, by your choice of words.

Agreed howieCA

Yeah, cause that is the same thing. God next thing you know they'll outlaw marriages altogether and force us to join up with the Apes!

Divorce??

sloppyjoes-
"What next?!?? incest!?! marriages??"

it is a lot worse than any of those- we will have corporate mergers and corporatism- you know, the end of the world as we know it.

Mothers and sons along with dads and daughters marrying are coming to a church near you.

There's a valid biological reason why immediate family members should not reproduce with each other. Since homosexuals by definition won't be reproducing with each other, your argument is invalid.

I love the "what's next" argument, like allowing same-sex unions will put us on a slippery slope to "man marries his dog" or some other such foolishness.

How about we just leave it as two consenting adults publicly vowing their undying love and support for each other - not too different from what we have now.

Since homosexuals "by definition" CAN'T reproduce that should clue you in to the fact that homosexuality ISN'T normal. It is no more normal than incest, pedophilia, necrophilia, etc. Something in the brain of a homosexual is not working correctly. I don't think that means you shouldn't be able to live in normal society and be treated humanely, but I do think that what happens in your bedroom shouldn't be forced upon the rest of society.

Also I heard the scariest rumor, they may allow folks of different COLORS to marry... uh oh zebra kids with red skin coming soon

Ok sarcasm off..... dont' judge anyone because you wouldn't want anyone judging you, oh and if you say" Go ahead judge me I have nothing to hide" then i'm sure your delusional because we've all had our ups and downs and we all just want love.

One love.... let's get together and feel alright.

Don't worry, No one's going to make you marry a homosexual.

What is the "being forced upon the rest of society" you're talking about? The point of the article is those who believe in tolerance ARE the rest of society now, hallelujah. How does it hurt anyone if two people declare their love and commitment to each other? OMG, might see two people of the same sex kissing on the courthouse steps. Ew, ick.

Grow up.

Disgusted - I really don't want what happens in ANYONE'S bedroom to be forced on me. You seem to suggest that the only thing preventing homosexual acts right now is the lack of a marriage certificate.

Someone mentioned above, and I have asked the same thing numerous times, how will your life be adversely affected if the gay couple living together down the street from you right now are allowed to marry?

disgusted

Homosexuals can most definitely reproduce. Just because their sexual orientation does not create the opportunity doesn't mean they physically can't reproduce.

Again, its 2 consenting adults who want to have the right to visit their loved one in a hospital, to be included in their will, to have the same legal securities two heterosexual people have when they enter into marriage.

Mark my words, if we let people of the same sex marry, we're going to be FORCED to let people of different races marry. Mark my words.

Cays have the same rights as married couples in Calif

[G]ays have the same rights as married couples in Calif

Not quite. There are differences in taxes, inheritance, gifts, recognition in other states, and federal privacy issues as well.

still have not answered my questions, who's doing the polls and where!?!?!?!

Sloppy... I see you're being ignored... shame. The polls where conducted by some illegitimate NGO to further encourage the communities (and Govt') to destroy every last vestige of decency in our society. They're conducted to give the illusion of legitimacy.

Nothing new.

What a crock. You sound like on of those stupid conspiracy theorists. Gallup is hardly an "illegitimate" organization, and they certainly have no agenda to destroy anything. They couldn't care less what the OUTCOME of any given poll is; they're just asking what people think. If you don't like to hear it, tough.

Three little words that can save the US economy: Gay bridal registry.

(Stolen from the Rally to Restore Sanity)

flbikerchick, Now that's a funny line.

LOL, that made my day!

You mean like here in FL, where the tea baggers actually managed to technically outlaw sex? Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the tea baggers passed a law in FL that outlaws sex with animals. And since humans are technically animals, sex with ANY live partner is technically illegal here in the Sunshine State. Well, at least the tea baggers won't be able to reproduce any longer.

Actually jri37 the majority DOES NOT have the final say in this matter. There's the small item of a law being US Constitutional to deal with. Just because a majority want something if it doesn't pass Constitutional muster then it's still a discriminatory law. Our founding fathers put that lil' item in there to keep the 'majority' from trampling on the rights of the 'minority'.

Please explain how it's up to the states to decide who people are allowed to fall in love with and marry jri37. I've always thought it was up to the two people involved.

jri37, the state-to-state deal is nonsense. Unless all of the states agree to honor other states' marriages, just like they do with drivers licenses, it won't work, and the Feds will have to move in.

It is the law of the country. Until the federal government repeals the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, it is a states rights issue.

jri

If DOMA itself is unconstitutional, then the law is irrelevant.

Jonathan,

DOMA is still law until deemed otherwise.

Said another way, quit trying to control others and allow them to do whatever they want to do with their own lives.

Don't like the program, change the channel.

Well said Cindy. This is exactly what is happening in America today!

Actually, Cindy-Irvine CA, in the US today people are being given the right to put their personal beliefs over others. For example, a story the other day about a high school graduation that's been held in a building with religious symbols for generations. ONE person last year didn't like the religious symbols, complained to the ACLU and now the school is being sued by the ACLU. ONE person!

Disgusted, well that is just disgusting. What? is the ACLU going to sue churches for displaying their 'religious' affiliation?

I am not religious in anyway, (more agnostic than athiest), but that is just going too far.

Heck, you don't even need to call it "life" partnership, given that 50% of all current heterosexual marriages end in divorce. "Temporary domestic partnership" is more accurate.

At the wedding to my partner of 17 years the pastor pronounced us "married." Ha, ha, ha, ha

Congrats Joe!

Thank you, Nora. It's never too late to send a gift. :-)

I agree, congrats to Joe. While I am not gay, my two best girlfriends are. They have been together for 26 years, and I wish some of my straight married friends could have as loving and faithful relationships as they do. As we all live in Florida, a state that is backward in many ways, the chance of equal marriage for all is dim. I asked them once why they didn't go to another state, but since they were both born and raised here, they said, they would wait till Florida passes a law here. They took their vows to each other 25 years ago at a private place and have remained true for all these years. I love these two, and my heart breaks that in this day and age, we still hurt people for selfish reasons that are based on personal religious reasons. That is not right or fair.

Truth be known, "woodsmen" haven't come out of the closet yet. Watch your back!

I imagine you live in the "red neck" of the woods?

isn't your shack under water these days?

Very uncool, sts.

agreed, withdrawn. . . I'll change it to, 'don't you have an alligator to feed your hand to?"

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Your ignorance is hilarious! Thank you, Debbie -- you've made my Friday.

Why do care what other people do when it doesn't affect you in the slightest?

Allowing 2 consenting adults to have the same rights you enjoy is hardly crap Debbie.

I'm sure this is all a part of their master plan to produce jobs, right? Where are the jobs, GOP?

Two typical leftposts - earth to John, Indiana and flbikerchick: there is NO (repeat NO) majority in favor of the degeneracy known as "same-sex" marriage now being palmed off as normal and progressive. What is happening is a very clever propaganda blitz by leftist media outlets using false polling data to convince Americans to accept such a legal fiction. The media pulled the same routine in the late Sixties and early Seventies to convince Americans to support legal abortion. That time it worked - this time no; count on it. You leftists are in fact about to pass into the dustbin of history; the days of creating egalitarian and libertine heavens on earth ended with the twentieth century.

I had to do some serious digging on wikipedia to figure out what this message was supposed to mean.........long story short, Bill here is old.

Apparently there was a study done at some point before my birth that stated circumcised men have a lower risk of getting HIV. Of course, like many scientific studies of the time, they got together a bunch of excited medical professionals but failed to get an actual scientist on board. This study has been debunked by several more since.

So......what's it like having varicose veins anyway?

Univers Student... I have bum veins. It's not pretty. Ok?

How about you? What's it like to have HIV? (fair question)

There are plenty of heterosexuals who shouldn't be ALLOWED to breed.

Say it aint so, there are some male lizards the breed.

The whole idea of Marriage is based upon the bible nimrods!

I am a straight man and I agree with you, flb, wholeheartedly. There are far too many here in florida alone who should be found incompetent to breed.

Michelle, you are on the mark, as well. I am sick to death of religious zealots destroying this country and the world.

Aceman, whoever told you that lied. Marriage is not based on the bible. Many cultures had marriage agreements without ever knowing about the bible ( actually more like property agreements as that is what women were considered in earlier times...even in the bible) without ever knowing about the bible....and just to stir the pot, polygamy was much more the norm than monogamy when comparing all cultures throughout history.

j. heron

Then why are most marriages in churches and performed by a priest?

Marriage and church are two different things...show me in Scripture the "ceremony" for a marriage...or does it simply say that God puts a marriage together. It was first hijacked by the "church" for control, then hijacked by the Government for control.....to the point that it seems most marriages are now put together by man not God.

The whole idea of Marriage is based upon the bible nimrods!

So quick to insult others while simultaneously exosing your own utter ignorance. The whole idea of marriage predates the Bible by a long span of time.

Or at least stop reading the Old Testament and focus on the teachings of Jesus Christ. I think you'll find he advocated tolerance and respect.

hampster - So the Bible has no bearing on the real world? You need to go to church and pray before it is too late.

Bill, the Bible has nothing to do with how we make laws in this country - I imagine that is what hampster meant. We are not a theocracy.

Citing the bible? Go to your church and pray? Lulz. Wow, you are a complete idiot.

Hey Bill I thought of it, but there are just so many religions, Gods, Scriptures that I just couldn't make up my mind. I was kind of drawn to Ganesha the Hindu elephant God, but then I am partial to blue.

flbikerchick, there was nothing tolerant about the way Jesus reacted to the moneychangers on the temple steps. Nothing tolerant at all. I'd also like to point out that Jesus was anything but tolerant of the religious leaders of his day. He mocked them and called them names.

Bill, you live in an imaginary world. Its about time we star denouncing all of the American fundamentalist that get far too much attention in this country. America does not need wedges issues, we need to talk about real issues to better our country. Should gays be allowed to marry, sure (states right), but its a waste of time to overshadow other really important issues that will affect more than 10 or so million Americans.

I'd also like to point out that Jesus was anything but tolerant of the religious leaders of his day.

Yep. He fought against the rigid structure they imposed with their ancient laws, like not healing on the Sabbath, or not allowing "unclean" persons to touch you or dine with you.

Hmm... what's another of those ancient laws? Forbidding sexual contact between members of the same gender.

What did Jesus say was the second most important commandment (after Love the Lord your God...)?

"Love thy neighbor as thyself."

The very ESSENCE of tolerance!

HowieCA...You're a smart guy ,,right? Do you love yourself... i bet you do!!

However the essence of tolerance is NOT manifest in loving your neighbor. I love my neighbor regardless of his deviant behavior - I don't have to tolerate his behavior. Understand the difference?

I doubt that you do.

I love my neighbor regardless of his deviant behavior - I don't have to tolerate his behavior.

How exactly do you NOT tolerate his behavior? Kill him for what he is doing in private? Leave him (or her) alone, and let GOD judge as he sees fit. You are no man's judge.

Next demand from the gays will be joint income tax returns.

Well, then, let's take away all those "perks" from heterosexuals. Then, if you're right, the gays' evil plot will be foiled!

It has always been about getting the same lawful benefits that hetero married couples have. Until last year a gay partner couldn't even be with their partner as family if they were in intensive care and couldn't make decisions in the same case without lots of legal paperwork.

fibik - Stupid comment........................................

@flbikerchick - cheers! I agree! Everyone should be given the same perks - regardless of who they choose to snuggle nekkid with. Can't believe this is even still in issue in a country that is supposed to be one of the most advanced.

Why, Bill? Afraid YOU'LL lose some of those perks? If you don't want others to have them, you shouldn't have them, either. If you want them, then you have to share with everyone. Very simple concept, usually covered in the first few years of elementary school.

If you're REALLY opposed to gay marriage, move to the Middle East. You'd like it there. I've heard they toss gays off rooftops. Sounds like your kind of folks.

flbikerchick makes a lot more sense than you do bill.

And this eating of shellfish has got to stop!

bill in houston,

very stupid comment.....

This survey is a complete crock! It is simply a reflection of the increase in depraved people in the country but it FAR from becoming a majority position.

So, your personal opinion on how many people feel a certain way is more reliable than a poll that ASKS people how they feel? May I ask... where exactly do you get YOUR numbers from?

Howie... It doesn't really matter where the numbers come from - for either position... Only truth matters... and you know not the truth.

oh yeah, the "truth" comes from some invisible magic man in the sky......

telling us to multiply like stupid rabbits until we suck everything dry.

then, the imaginary friend won't be there to save us from our own delusions.

Danwill,, Did you plagiarize Orwell for that enlightening comment?

Wow, you think I'm on par with Orwell?

Maybe I should start writing...

Dan, Check it out...You get straight to the point, you're concise, and a touch of poet-ism is evident!

...all commendable traits...

To be fair, religion is not entirely to blame. There are many that are simply using religion to reinforce the biological imperative to reproduce. I see many things that are distressing when projected into the future, aquifers that are being depleted too quickly in order to grow crops to feed growing populations in many parts of the world, when these run dry, there is a huge potential for famines that could starve hundreds of millions. (India and China are among these places). The great fisheries of the world have shown precipitous declines, another grim reality.

yet the population continues to grow, but at a fortituously decreasing rate. however,the technological advances are not keeeping up with the curve. Our own reserves in the US are not what they used to be. many factors are running too close to call for the future of humanity. I truly do not want to see mass starvation, (honestly, I don't know of any sane person that does) yet if we keep multiplying without controlling ourselves, such is inevitable. I see both reason to hope, and reason to despair. I do respect religion for its ability to give hope where there is little reason to hope and for its attempt to give a moral framework for dealing with each other, yet I dislike the usage by some to use it to justify a belief that any problem is "all part of the 'Great Plan' ".

peace to you r johnson.

now if I could take all of these rambling thoughts, along with many others and write them into a book.....LOL

Very well put.

R.Johnson - You claimed that the survey results were a crock, and were far from a majority position. Then you claim I don't know the truth when I ask how you know that to be true. Did God come down and tell you personally that the poll was inaccurate? Did you do your own poll? Or are you really that arrogant as to believe that whatever YOU believe MUST be the truth? Polls are done to DISCOVER what people think, not to make a CLAIM to what they think. Believe what you wish, but it appears to be YOU that does not know the truth.

Keep your sexual preferences in private and don't dance like a fairy in public.

Yes, being victims of discrimination and hate crimes is SO glamorous....

fibik - Just why do you think that a crime committed against a gay person deserves special treatment? A crime is a crime and if you get your purse robbed it should be equal justice for all. But no, gays feel they deserve special treatment. I wonder why?

Keep your sexual preferences in private and don't dance like a fairy in public.

@ Bill, okay you too. Don't hold hands with your spouse/girlfriend/date, or kiss them or dance in public...because maybe gay people don't want to see that either.

I think hate crimes committed against any humans should be treated the same regardless of sexual orientation, race, or religion. In case you haven't noticed (and clearly you have not), the problem is not that the gays want SPECIAL treatment. It's that they want the SAME treatment heterosexuals receive.

@K Snider: Heterosexuals don't want to watch Bill kiss anyone or dance in public, either. Brrrrrr!!!!

Just why do you think that a crime committed against a gay person deserves special treatment?

Because for a long time they weren't even considered to even be crimes. "Sure, I beat him up, but he's just a fag."

Just why do you think that a crime committed against a gay person deserves special treatment?

She didn't say they deserved "special treatment" she only said that being the victims of such crimes is "so glamorous" in a tongue in cheek way.

Again, whether it's a crime being committed or civil rights - all people should be treated the same regardless of their sexual preference, color of skin, bank account, IQ level, last name...blah blah blah. Equality for all.

As soon as you add the hate word to crime in reference to one specific group of people you are saying they deserved a greater punishment than the same crime committed against another person...and that is special treatment.