He didn't say anything to me.

You will win zero friends here w that image.I suspect lesbians find that as repellant as we do

I don't believe in gay marriage . But I also don't really give a damn either way. This is just a diversionary tactic by the NBC staff working to get Obama re-elected.

What - Is that photo of you supposed to turn on heterosexual women?

God made them male and female.

Sure... or evolution resulted in two genders in order to increase genetic diversity. But whatever. Believe in your fairytale.

""When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other
specific laws and how to follow them.

1. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?

2. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual cleanliness - Lev.15:19-24. The problem is,
how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

3. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend
of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can
you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

4. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated
to kill him myself?

5. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don.t agree. Can you settle this?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I
have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading
glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room
here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.
19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn.t we just burn them to
death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with
their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)""

What's the sense of gay marriage? The family tree just ends there.

resist it all you like, but gee whiz, what directions are the polls going? what direction are church memberships going? yes, we know what direction the intensity of resistance by the conservative church is going, but how long do you really think you can hold back the tide? i know you think this one is immutable but look at kallie's list 1-10 and tell me which ones they thought were immutable back then. they moved on, either you will too or you will go to your grave holding on.

trust me, your place will be taken by someone with a more open mind.

you are not too bright Mr. Binkie....in this day of adoption, family trees have nothing to do with procreation of the participants.

mr binkie,

for the sake of mrs binkie, if there is one, i hope your concept of marriage includes more than just procreation. if it does, make a list. then think of how others might appreciate those elements in their relationships.

Absurd.Those words are written,doesn't mean we believe them.Really so you would equate sanctioning homosexual marriage because the bible says to sell slaves.Silly arguement of a child.,who can cut and paste.

I heard this one this morning I thought was funny. For those who love to quote scripture.

"The Bible is 100% accurate. It says so in the Bible."

Kallie,

That has to be the best post I've ever read.

Kallie - Great post!

The major problem I see is that people want to claim marriage is a fundamental right for all people, and yet still support laws prohibiting things such as marriage to relatives. There are obviously limits on it for good reasons. Additionally, supporting gay marriage is supporting a change to the traditional definition of marriage. If the motivation behind it is based on something like tax equality, then the fight should be for a domestic partnership to have the same benefits as a marriage.

Yes, We Gay (happy, that is!)

this show how democrats with two faces because the election

Kallie, firstly that Can I Own A Canadian joke has been around for years find some new material, and second Item B of your post at 1.8 is garbage ....

1. mammals (except for humans) do not and are not homosexual please look up the word anthropomorphic and remember it in the future, and even your 10% figure is not backed up by any scientific or legitimate survey of the general population that is a crap figure that has been bandied about by the promoters of the Gay Agenda and has never ever and will never ever be proven by any standard.

2. Why is it that incest, infanticide and other animal instincts are not applied, as what you seem to be saying is acceptable human behavior because animals do it. The arguement holds no water and never has.

3. I don't care what consenting adults do with their own time and I don't care what you think your family fought for.......I do care about science and facts and you have presented neither.

4. Until proven otherwise homosexual behavior in humans is overwhelmingly a result of intelligent choice.....sorry.

So it's about time we allow gay marriage so we can move on to real issues that matter!

Sorry, but this is the type of liberal thinking that drives me crazy. Bring a social issue that effects a small % of Americans into the SPOTLIGHT...then we can move on to a budget...or unemployment....or middle east....or the economy.

First things first, says the progressive liberal.

What's the sense of gay marriage? The family tree just ends there.

So what. Millions of married hetero couples choose not to have children. Millions more cannot because of biological or medical reasons. Do you ban their marriages? Since when is procreating a pre-requisite for marriage?

Raider -- if millions of Americans are not considered equal under the law, then it's an issue. Civil rights and equality make it so.

It just surprises me that, in a constitutional republic, we still allow the civil rights of some people to be up for a vote. That's not the way this constitutional republic was designed or intended.

Additionally, supporting gay marriage is supporting a change to the traditional definition of marriage.

Oh baloney. This was the same tired argument in the 1960's when the religious tried banning interracial marriage. Back THEN, the religious right claimed the traditional definition of marriage was "a man and a woman of the same race...it always has been, always will be!" And so on. But, the definition changed. It has been changing for centuries. It will continue to change, no matter how much the haters want to claim they own it.

If the motivation behind it is based on something like tax equality, then the fight should be for a domestic partnership to have the same benefits as a marriage.

Rubbish! The motivation behind it is: EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW.

Grow up!

I find it amazing idiots like "woman 1959" use Leviticus to say Gay marriage shouldn't be legal while wearing mixed fibers, snacking on a ham sandwich, and making reservations for dinner at the local Red Lobster restaurant screaming at the top of their voices that "the old testament doesn't count..." Dumbsh!ts should learn to read their own babble...

@Kallie, If you had more than a limited understanding of the Bible, then you would realize that God made a New Covenent through Jesus. In the New Testament, there is nothing explicity written about homosexuality, but any mention of a physical union does mention males and females. This indicates an implicit understanding that any sexual union should be made as is intended, male and female. The Older Writings always mention homosexual behaviour in a bad light, such as the gang of men wanting the stranger sent out so they could have sex with him, male shrine whores, and the like. This gives the impression that a homosexual was considered so depraved that they were obviously committing other heinous acts.

This poll is a reflection of a society that has been brow beaten and intimidated by the radical left wing gay and lesbian movement and impressionable youth have been brainwashed and reeducated to believe that somehow this is normal behavior. Unfortunately what might have been a civilized discourse has turned into charges of bigotry and hate. People have been cowed by this abusive behavior so they tell the polls what they think they want to hear. They go against their personal beliefs because the topic makes them uncomfortable and/or they just want to be left alone. Now, when voting on the issue in the privacy of the ballot booth it's an entirely different story.

I don't care what consenting adults do with their own time and I don't care what you think your family fought for.......I do care about science and facts and you have presented neither.

I'm pretty sure that anyone in the Marines has a clear understanding of what they were fighting for - namely, the protection of the freedom of American citizens.

I couldn't care less about your view on homosexuality - or your views on Kallie's post for that matter - but you don't deserve to call yourself an American if you are going to be so disrespectful to the soldiers who fight for us everyday - and the families that support them.

Please, do us all a favor and stay in Australia.

@what_the_81, You look GREAT! People who comment on your appearance in your photo are the same ones that are thumping the bible at us.....Shows how judgmental they are, consider the source.

"The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice."

- Martin Luther King Jr.

The travesty here, and the question that not one, single, anti-equality person can answer is this...

If SCOTUS has ruled that marriage is a civil right over 14 times, why are we putting it up to a vote?

And all you "gay agenda", paranoid folks...

Lol, I'm fairly sure only us straight people receive copies of this "gay agenda" the conservatives speak of. I've never met a gay person, who's whipped a legal pad out of their briefcase, and started checking off items, "Bring depravity unto the world... Check. Corrupt innocent children... Check. Make sure John Boehner gets turned into a pillar of salt... Check. Burn at least three Bibles... Check."

And who comes up with this agenda??? Do they have a "Yearly Convention of the Gays" where elected LGBT folks get together and decide how they want to destroy morality and the world, that year? Or is it more secretive, like the Masons?

No, I think the "gay agenda" probably goes something like this...

1. Be born.

2. Get educated.

3. Get a job.

4. Get married.

5. Raise a family.

6. Retire.

7. Die fat and happy.

Thankful and Woman1959,

Do either of you have anything that holds water in our legal system to back up your positions? I mean, you can post Bible quotes all day long, but they mean nothing in our society.

This isn't a religious question, it's a LEGAL one.

DMc,

@Kallie, If you had more than a limited understanding of the Bible, then you would realize that God made a New Covenent through Jesus.

The same goes for you. Do you have anything, substantive, that can actually be used to support your belief that gay marriage shouldn't be legal? The Bible only counts for whether or not YOU get gay married, not whether or not OTHER people can.

So please, explain to me how two people entering into a contractual property agreement, infringes on someone's freedom of religion?

No one is trying to force their beliefs or lifestyles on you. In fact, the complete opposite is true.

WE don't use gay relationships as an issue in politics, the right does. We advocate for NOT using them, NOT caring, NOT legislating based on sexual orientation. As in treating them the same as straight people.

In order to stop us from doing that. In order to stop us from repealing laws that SPECIFICALLY make an issue out of being gay or not, the right uses they're Bibles, morals, and religions. When, quite clearly, in our nation, those things have no standing.

It was the right that legislated homosexuality. DADT, DOMA, sodomy laws... It is the right that's fighting to keep legislating homosexuality. They need to stop using it as a political issue, and we will then cease to say anything about their methods and how they go about using them or defending them.

Sarah,

Great post!

Great post Sarah!

I cannot believe that some people are still trying to take us back. We are in 21st century!!!!

@Sarah-3043284 - thank you for your post, I agree with everything you said.

So please, explain to me how two people entering into a contractual property agreement, infringes on someone's freedom of religion?

THAAAAANK YOU!

So please, explain to me how two people entering into a contractual property agreement, infringes on someone's freedom of religion?

Non-married people enter into contractual property agreements all the time. It's very common. What are you talking about?

"I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. For me as a Christian, it is a sacred union. You know, God is in the mix." ~ Barack Obama

Freedman,

Marriage, is a contractual property agreement, predating organized religion. It has nothing to do with anything holy or spiritual, that would be Holy Matrimony.

Ergo, when people use the "It's against my religion" or "It's infringing on my religious rights" arguments... THEY ARE FULL OF IT.

Thank you, everyone!!! Enough is enough. This is just completely unjust.

Hi Sarah,

If it's about property agreements then there really isn't a big problem is there?

People make all different types of property agreements everyday. You and I could even do one together if we decided to.

freedman: but you ignore (willfully, I'm guessing) that you and I cannot make a property agreement that would include me on your insurance coverage as your wife could be, or that I could inherit your property without tax disadvantages (as your wife could up to a certain value), or that I could make medical decisions for you were you (heavens forfend) to be incapacitated, or that I could draw your Social Security if you died before I did, or that I could legally immigrate to this country to live with you if we fell in love, etc., etc.

wow the homocidal lifestyle agenda has 50% of people blinded. I guess if you withhold sex from people long enough they'll vote for whoever will drink their lower region blood or their shyt just wow...

The Supreme Court will determine gay marriage bans as unconstitutional. People can quote scripture all they want, it won't matter. Gays will be allowed to marry, and it won't affect me, or any other straight person, in the least.

I agree Darthfrodo. People marrying the same sex for love should be no ones business but their own. I married my husband in the supreme court house in the Bronx and not in a church. Does this make my marriage any less sacred? It is sacred to us. We still have the piece of paper. And I mean sacred as in our love is there. Not some church mumbo jumbo. People need to move on to real issues and learn to either mind their business or pull the pepper outta their ass!!!!!!! Gays getting married will not be the downfall of humanity. It will be the extremists of the world and their idiotic, one sided, narrow minded views.

Oh baloney. This was the same tired argument in the 1960's

It's the same argument because it's still true. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. Or do you have some source that you can cite that shows otherwise? You can hate that fact all you want, but it will exist in spite of your distaste for it.

The motivation behind it is: EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW.

You might want to make sure all the homosexuals out there are aware of this. I know several that couldn't care less, as long as their partnerships receive the same benefits as a marriage.

Grow up!

Ah, one of the hallmark signs of the intolerant. Accusations of juvenile maturity when another's opinion differs from your own.

Marriage, is a contractual property agreement, predating organized religion. It has nothing to do with anything holy or spiritual, that would be Holy Matrimony.

Sarah, where did you come up with this? Even google is failing to help me find support for the assertion that it predates organized religion.

As a Christian to me gay marriages r wrong God created Adam and Eve not any other way it saddens me that we keep taking God out of everything and then wondering why things happen. To me it's a sad day!!!!

Where was the poll taken, San Francisco? Even the liberal state of California voted against gay marriage, then a stupid fed judge overruled. Tell me how many states where gay marriage is legal where the public was allowed to vote on the issue?

Take the Christian debate out of the issue. It's not normal, that thing where the sun doesn't shine was made for something to exit not something to enter.

PH#########

Kellie Said

A) As a Marine Corp family, we did not support this country so it's citizens could discriminate. There has to be absolute equality for all people.

I said

and I don't care what you think your family fought for

You said

but you don't deserve to call yourself an American if you are going to be so disrespectful to the soldiers who fight for us everyday - and the families that support them.

Please, do us all a favor and stay in Australia.

HMMMMMMM not sure exactly how you got disrespectful to soldiers out of that however, I do find it somewhat disrespectful to all citizens and especially soldiers when someone claims to have a priority opinion because they are a "Marine Corp Family", I suspect almost all of us could trace a background and claim to be a member of a Military Family, I know I can.

I am certain that all soldiers fight to defend the Constitution of the United States which includes freedom of speech and on that basis your insinuation that because I excerised my right to that freedom I do not deserve to be a citizen.....that seems more disrespectful than my questioning someone elses thought processes and opinions. You can have think about that, but to the best of my knowledge being in a military family (or even in the military) does not grant you more rights or freedoms than any other citizen.

I would hope that you remain in your little space and do not venture in to my neck of the woods....we don't like your kind down here ... people who hold that their opinions deserve a higher ranking and that people who disagreed or dispute that by exercising their right to free speech should be denied citizenship.

Oops how does that leather taste?

Woman 1959

For someone that believes in Hell then surely you believe in God and His Word.

I don't have to believe in god to believe hell exists. For me hell is a place where I'm constantly judged by people who think they are holier than others, like you!

Tastes just fine! :-)

Actually the educated half not the unwashed barbarians like you...

Well if you are pro gay then you probably wouldn't discriminate against polygamy? If we legalize gay marriage then I guess we should make polygamy legal also? Probably many other things should be considered legal as well. I mean after all marriage was defined as between 1 man and 1 woman. If you throw that definition out the window then it could be a lot of things? So I'm sure all you gay activist won't mind polygamy?

WTF.....I could care less at how many people 'YOU' marry. I wouldn't do it. But if you want to, go right ahead. Try having 20 wives it's already accepted in UTAH. Your comment is flawed and adolescent.

SOL1,

And, here we go with the strawman arguments...

The polygamy/group marriage argument: Fails. There isn't enough public interest to support the complications surrounding accross the board legal polygamy. We would have to spend the time and money rewriting tax law, insurance law, family law, probate law, yada, yada, yada.

The pedophilia/inanimate object/besitality argument: Fails. Children, animals, and random objects lack recognized legal capacity under the law. They can't consent, they can't contract, they don't get to vote, yada, yada, yada. Continuing, homosexuality is not a mental illness, it's not listed in the DSM-IV and has no negative impact on society.

The incest argument: Incest is based on abuse, power, and control. Show me two immediate family members, who had healthy, non-abusive upbringings, know that they're related, and still want to marry, and I'll say go for it.

The marriage is religious argument: Fails. Marriage is a contractual property agreement predating all organized religion. You're thinking of Holy Matrimony. Nor is the public or society a party to the contract. The consideration is only between the two legal adults. That's why society doesn't get a share in everyone's divorce, we don't sign the lisense, we don't get the kids every other weekend.

The majority rules argument: Fails. We're a Republic, we don't vote on civil rights, and marriage is a civil right. SCOTUS has ruled in one 14 different times. This means you need a reason that passes strict scrutiny to prohibit marriage. None of the following are legal reasons... The Bible, your personal beliefs, Jesus, God, religion, your morals, unproven paranoia.

The state shouldn't place no religion, above religion: Fails. Nothing doesn't equal something. Overturning religious based legislation, in no way supports Athieism. Again I thank you Indie for this fantastic example... If you're pushing against a wall, and you stop, does that mean the wall is now pushing you? No. If a lack of religion constituted a support of Athieism, we would have to write disclaimers on every single, non religious, thing in the country.

The I don't want it in my face argument: Fails. Get over yourself. There are just as many people out there that don't want your relationship in their face either, does that mean you should live in a closet? No. Get over yourself. If you don't like something, don't pay attention. Not being able to unjustifiably force people to conform to how you want them to be, isn't an infringment on your freedoms. Call me when someone forces you to be gay or have gay friends, or like the gay lifestyle. Until than, get over yourselves. I don't "like" Jackie Chan movies, does that mean anyone who does shouldn't be able to watch them??? Because I "don't want it in my face"?

The it's unnatural argument: So are a lot of things you don't argue against. Like babies with health issues surviving. That's not supposed to happen according to "survival of the fittest" and "natural selection" either. Nor is marriage about procreation. Look at all the couples who don't want/have kids, and all the single people who do.

Well said, Sarah. Its sad it has to keep being said.

Allswell,

As I said yesterday, I will post it as many times as I have to. Feel free to re-post it also.

Sarah

You post the same thing day after day. Your arguments about things being against the law hold no water. That's what this is all about, changing the law. If you let gays marry what will be next? Sarah, is there anything so perverse that you would not want it in your life, your town, your state?

John: when you write, "If you let gays marry what will be next?" you're engaging in the "slippery slope" logical fallacy. I mean, when women got the vote in the early twentieth century, it didn't result in children or barnyard animals getting to vote later on, did it? As for your question "what will be next?" Who knows? I can't tell the future and I'm betting you can't either.

Treating each other in a Godly manner does not equate to accepting or promoting sin (as gay marriage would).

We are to show mercy with the hope of repentance by faith in Jesus.

Promoting sin means you are participating in it. 2 John 1:11 equates even giving a person who does not abide in the teachings of Christ a greeting to participation in evil deeds.

We do not throw stones, but we do take up Jesus' message of "sin no more".

Are you walking around telling gays to marry? That would be promoting sin (in your eyes anyway).

Why not just let them be happy. Isn't that what Jesus would do?

Actually Thankful you're going against your own religions teachings. One, by judging gays and two, by not giving them their 'freedom of choice' which is also included in the bible. IF they make a sinful 'choice' then it is THEIRS to make and not yours to stop them. Your own bible states that when it comes to a judgement day YOU will stand for your own sins, no one else's.

If that is what you believe Mama Judy, than more power to you. But there are a lot of people out there who are not religious and do not believe in god, like me. So they do not take god into consideration when they make decisions to do things. And if there is a God, isn't he supposed to be a forgiven and understanding one? I do not recall seeing a man floating on a cloud anywhere. I feel a lot of religious people, especially in the south where I moved, are a little much. They are obsessed with a friggin book and a tad extreme. Funny to see the faces of these people when they drop and there is no pearly gate. And if you choseto lead a religious lifestyle, that is your right, just like others have rights too. No one has the right to tell someone else who to love. I have been involved with woman as well as men, and if there is a god, he didnt strike me down. He actually blessed me with a loving husband and three wonderful children. So I think religion should probably be taken a little lighter.

Yep. History repeats.............Next the walls of Rome will be set on fire, opps forgot it already on fire.

Bari has been taking fiddle lessons.

poor jesse: open a window. Is the sky still up there? Breathe.....

You do know Rome fell because it spread its defenses too thin and was then split into two by two opposing emperors. One looking to the old gods and the other to Christianity.

SO the decline of Rome was it became to big to govern and of course religion.

Wow, good thing we don't live in Rome, huh Jesse?

Gay marriage existed in Rome's ascension, its golden age, and was outlawed in it's decline.

If you are going to rely upon mere correlation rather than causation, at least make sure the correlation is accurate.

For example, Krestov accurately pointed our Rome declined after the introduction of christianity. It doesn't prove causation, but it is thought provoking given that it is factually accurate.

Jesse, you know what started the downfall of Rome? The adoption of Christianity as the state religion.

Toasty, Christianity was not the primary factor but only a part of the reason with decadence, monetary trouble, and military problems contributing to the Fall of Rome. Imperial incompetence and chance could be added to the list. Even the rise of Islam is proposed as the reason for Rome's fall, by some who think the Fall of Rome happened at Constantinople in A.D. 1453.

If it makes you feel good.You might remember too that noone opposed has suggested they are perfect.Imperfection doesn't mean we must throw away our beliefs.Changing the yardstick is how we have equal opportunity dummies getting jobs etc they don't deserve.Blacks agree w this.Just because marriage fails half the time doesn't mean we should throw it out.It just means people are more immature and narcissistic than in the past

Pained: you are at great pains to pretend someone else's beliefs on equality are somehow a threat to you and that throwing away bigotry is "throwing away beliefs". Shame on you...pretending with-holding civil rights from others is anything other than what it is...pure, unadulterated hate.

You can say all you want about my viewpoint.The fact that I don't approve does not= hate.Childish at best to try to wring that "truth " out of my statement.

hard to disagree

NBC will do anything to avoid talking about barack. I wonder if they get a payoff or if they just can't help themselves.

Oh, it's a lower priority for many, but I also believe in multitasking.

By the way, have you seen how many articles are political on this site?! How about ones on the economy? How many are about gay issues? Maybe 2%? I'd say that isn't too much of a distraction for anyone who doesn't care about the issue.

So, if this is an attempt to change the conversation, it's the right-wing nut jobs that are doing it. It's not the progressives bringing up this ammendment. It's not the Democrats that are passing laws all across the country that limit women's rights. Want to talk about those other things? How about the morons in Tennessee that say teachers should be able to teach creationism in science class? How about yet another law passed by the US Congress that outlaws using federal money for abortions - even though it was already illegal?

Democrats would be happy to get on to the business of working to improve this nation, but the morons on the right would rather spend their time sending us back to the stone ages and protect their rich friends and potential lobby jobs after they leave office.

It's not an attempt to change the conversation. It's in the news because of the recent vote by NC, so the makers of news drag out everything related to gay marriage again. It's an attempt to fill the headlines.

Leroy---

For someone who thinks there are better things to do and to talk about...you are spending an awful lot of time on this thread. You should leave.

Do you think that most who oppose gay marriage would be okay with the same type of union, but with the use of a word other than 'marriage'?

I think most inteligent people are worried about actual problems facing humans. Not in terminology about relationships. Sleep with whoever will let you. What about unemployment and gas prices. Dinner at Taco Bell is about 8 bucks these days. A good steak is 10 bucks, an you have to cook it yourself.

It would go a LONNNNGG way to mollifying peoples' fears,yes.

Oh really pained? So 150 some years ago when Lincoln freed the slaves you wouldn't have been ok with changing the meaning of the word "free"?

So 80 some years ago when voting rights were extended to women, you wouldn't have been ok with changing the meaning of "voting rights"?

So 50 some years ago you wouldn't have been ok with changing the meaning of "civil rights" when LBJ outlawed discrimination based on race.

And now you're against changing the meaning of the word "marriage".

People like you will never be free while you enslave yourself with racism and bigotry.

You really are a sad, pathetic, little man.

You are a fool wringing "truths" out of my comments.Those are your words .You are a fool to NOT see the falling away of values that translates to societal collapse. OOOh you got racism and bigotry out of that-I can guess about you,it would be less far off

Pained, that exact same argument was used to oppose interracial marriage.

Yes indeed -

I'm sure a lot of people might still have problems, sure. There are always going to be homophobes who - usually in some sort of religious fervor - will treat homosexuals like animals. It's unfortunate, but it's inevitable... like racism.

That said, if the LGBTA would stop fighting for "marriage" and instead fight for civil unions, I'd think they'd make a lot more headway a whole lot sooner. A lot of Christians I know are offended at the idea of homosexuals "marrying" simply because to them marriage is a sacred institution. So when people that - according to the Bible - are engaged in immoral activity are getting married, it supposedly cheapens something that they hold very dear. (These same Christians have told me they don't mind civil unions on a state-by-state basis, they just don't want the word "marriage" redefined.)

Noryc: didn't Plessy v. Ferguson teach us that "separate but equal" is inherently unequal to those kept separate? Do we really need to learn that painful lesson all over again?

I'm guessing you conveniently forgot the Tea Party violence we saw in 2009-2010...

I don't recall the Tea party Bombing bridges over traintracks. How many people can fit on one train. Ohio seems up for grabs. Obama dropped the rock .

No, they preferred to cut gas lines and throw firebombs into congressional offices.

Leroy the TEA Party is noted for it's Nazi extremest members who shoot families and then commit suicide like JT Ready in AZ or get killed by rivals in their drug dealings like David Lynch....

Oh and the reason those "News outlets" pulled the story is that those terrorists were anarchists not occupiers you moron....

Stop watching FUX Noise they don't do news ....

Why is this a stale story when NC just voted for Ammendment 1? How stale is a 12 hour old story? - when you posted your idiotic comment, it wasn't even 12 hours old. Idiot

Seriously, for having such a "left-wing bias," the media sure buried the story about the Arizona neo-nazi teabagger who supported Russell Pearce.

Leroy....up to this point I am following you, you have your opinions, and you see this as a distraction (which I totally agree with) but it seems you did not read the entire article in respect to the 5 nut cases in Ohio...they were not part of or connected to the "occupy movement" in any way other than they were seen hanging around some of the gatherings.....who wasn't?

What you have here is 5 nut case radicals (left / right it doesn't matter they are all of the same cloth) who were pissed off and blame the rest of the world for their problems, probably had far too much drugs and alcohol, too much time on their hands and were not very smart.....

The story was there the media tried to write some level of political controversy in to it....and you bit. These clowns are no different than any radicals religious, political, social, economical their fears, beliefs, delusions etc coupled their lack of intelligence and their inability to distinguish fact from fantasy cause them to become human time bombs just waiting to go off.

I would hope that the remainer of the human race can separate these people from the intelligent debate between differing opinions and viewpoints......without resorting to trying to identify one viewpoint or another with these radical nut jobs.

Carry on ..... love your work.

Well actually some were made differently and frankly marriage is about commitment and love and less about sex.

So appreciate if you dragged your mind out of the bedroom for a minute and think deeply why you think others should not be able to celebrate their commitment and love for one another?

How dare those militants peacefully stand up for their constitutional liberties?

All the sexual argument does is beg the question: why is it ok for the government to regulate our sex lives? Do we really believe that we need to legislate what happens in the bedroom? There are a lot of straight couples who enjoy anal sex - does that mean they shouldn't be married? Should they be arrested? What about oral sex? Should that be allowed? Why?

Your sex argument can only stand fair if it applies to all couples who may be "perverting the sex act." I highly doubt that anyone, gay or straight, would want legislation based on such a narrow view.

LonesomeR: your error is in believing that people were "made." The evolved. And their sexuality evolved to serve many purposes, not just one.

WHat about the women who like anal sex? How does that fit into the natural order of things?!

Tina: pretty well for some men I hear!

As far as I know there are no longer any laws preventing consenting adults from participating in well whatever within the bounds of their own abode......and this has nothing to do with that, why bring it up?

and Krestov....now you tell me????

TO: Richard-4125089:

I read your statement then had my friends read it. We laughed for about 10 minutes.

• -----------WAKE UP AMERICA-----------
• ---------VOTE CONSERVATIVE 2012-------

Up until this year we were known as a christian nation. Obama announced we no longer are a Christian nation. Yet he says he prays every day. He says he is Christian. Atheist faker pandering for votes.

Actually America has NEVER been a Christian nation. That's something that Christians like to say, though it's not true. Just because Christians call America a Christian nation does not make it so. Officially the united states has no official religion, hence it can't be nor could ever have been a christian nation.

It is in fact true.All the quotes,the separation of church and state do not change that..John H-we all agree-we F***ing hate lawyers,and lawyer speak

@pained1, Um, what? I can't tell what you are saying? or not saying. Only thing I can see is your trying to claim something as true, if so provide evidence.

Christian nation my ass. We are a nation that has a secular government that happens to be majority christian. That will change in time, but thankfully the government being secular will stay the same.

The heart,will of the people is christian.The future will bring enclaves YOU are not welcome to-sry

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

- "Establishment Clause" to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution

Well the Treaty of Tripoli, 1796-97 and signed by President John Adams, Article 11 states:

"Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion, etc.. etc.."

So the "heart,will of the people" can be what it want's to be but our county is and always has been a secular nation with secular laws.

And personally I would avoid a christian enclave like the plague if they were ever formed anyway.

Leroy study some history instead of staying stuck on stupid....

Nora: I wholly agree with you, but your point is even stronger. The Treaty of Tripoli was ratified by the Senate. Ratified treaties and the Constitution are the "supreme law of the land," trumping acts of Congress.

*sigh*

Gallup's methodology has consistently been found robust. Further this poll is far from shocking. Most recent polls, including Pew, have reflected the same numbers. Public sentiment is changing. Primarily as the population ages.

Funny how Lord always seems to doubt polls that show his personal beliefs are in the minority...

IF Gallup is purposely skewing the results of the poll, don't you think the resulting percentages would be wider apart???

Lord of the Universe.....how dare you question the validity of polls, what's wrong with you??????

There are always 3 things you need to know about any poll or survey

• who paid for it (and someone always does)
• what were the questions that were asked
• and what was the polling sample

Then ask yourself "is that a big number"? Most polls are created to achieve a desired outcome for and on behalf of whoever paid for it.

.Here and now you're bitching like it was taken away.You should be thankful you don't have to hide.

I take it you've never heard of the Fourteenth Amendment, Pained?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Thomas Jefferson

Just have the sex and don't risk HALF of EVERYTHING you own.

OVER-RATED. Over-rated.

As that may be, it should still be equally available. Sorry your marriage sucked, they can be tough sometimes.

Overrated or not leroy, you have the freedom to marry who you love, they do NOT!

I'm pushing 50, Been married twice, and still a virgin. The brown eye is sacred.

Wake up you do realise that the bible has been translated from one language to another for thousands of years. Lots of mistakes and mistranslations have made there way into it.

Kinda like having 20 people in a single line you tell the first person in the line a simple sentence and by the time it gets to the end the last person will not be close to what the sentence started at.

Plus another thing you non-believers understand is the words in the bible that are in them have words that had changed since then.

Like Virgins, that world back in the day was ment as a woman who had never been married. It did not mean that they had not had sex yet. So might want to go and learn several other meaning of words and how they changed. Might make you understand that your applying today's definition to words that mean something else back then.

You have a very small view of the God of the Bible if you believe He is not able to preserve the integrity of His word to man. If you would look into it you would find that God's Word, the Bible, has been more faithfully preserved throughout time that all literary works. There is no equal.

*

Hi Leroy.

Hey Leroy, I think it would be stupid of Obama to make a big announcement that he supports gay marriage at this time. He doesn't have to say anything, he has done more to help gay rights than any other administration has.

Exactly leroy brown, just killing 'Don't ask don't tell' was more than any other administration has ever did for gay rights!

Bigger than Clinton signing don't ask don't tell?

The voters trumped Gallup by a country mile. The voters are sovereign, Gallup uses high-tech ouija boards.

"Don't ask, don't tell." was so fair that everyone hated it equally.