Same-Sex Marriages - Protect the Rights of Homosexuals

Related Issues: Gay Rights , 2008 Election

Tags: homosexual , marriage , same sex , gay

Similar Letters: Search for letters similar to this one

Wednesday, 03/26/2008 @ 01:05 PM PST

To whom it may concern:

Should you win the November general election and become the next President of the United States, you will have a very unique opportunity to pursue a file that would serve as legacy setting for you and a historic landmark in progressive politics in America.

Same sex marriage is a hot button issue that has yet to have a high profile national politician champion it. Homosexuals have continuously been awarded equal legal status in numerous court cases over the past decade or so, including in areas regarding workplace rights and wrongful dismissal.

Several states have made progressive decisions with regards to the rights of same sex couples to share legal benefits and enter partnerships with their companions. It seems essentially inevitable that the Supreme Court will eventually decide that the gay community is entitled to complete equality, including in the field of marriage.

The thrust of opposition to same sex marriage comes from the religious right; this is the same voting bloc that have advocated dangerous policies such as restricting sex education, abortion rights, women’s rights and offered the underpinning of support for the war in Iraq.

They are wrong on this issue and history will prove them to be such unequivocally.

As President Kennedy’s administration is remembered for his support of the black civil rights movement, despite opposition in many of the regions you will find opposition to same sex marriage should you pursue it, you could be remember as a precedent setting President who launched the gay community onto the same level as the rest of America in regards to what is essentially its final frontier.

You have been unafraid to take on positions not yet mainstream throughout your career and your courage in this regard constitutes a large part of the record you are now running on and will be successful on should you be elected. This is another issue where great social progress is very possible and you have a unique opportunity to be its flag bearer.

I am confident you will make the right decision and find yourself on the right side of history when it is written on same sex marriage.

Warm Regards,

AJChambers

Total Comments: 317

Write your own comment on this letter!

	Rockstar, on 03/26/2008 @ 11:25 PM PST wrote:
		I couldn't disagree more.

	fcabanski, on 03/28/2008 @ 12:14 PM PST wrote:
		The thrust of opposition comes with hijacking the term marriage. What's wrong with a "legal union" with all the legal rights and responsibilities of marriage?

	Katya, on 03/28/2008 @ 12:51 PM PST wrote:
		I find this line in particular to be extremely naive: "The thrust of opposition to same sex marriage comes from the religious right." In poll after poll of the American people, this issue gets a thumbs down from all walks of life and political ideologies. "In the last three elections, the Voter News Service exit poll registered the gay vote between 4 percent and 5 percent." That would mean that only a small margin of voters in this country truly cares about this issue. Permit civil unions, but marriage isn't going to happen any time soon.

	DotNetAllDay, on 03/28/2008 @ 08:39 PM PST wrote:
		The rights of same-sex couples should be taken care of by (and equate to) civil unions. If I were AJChambers, I'd try to get that passed. Leave marriage to the heteros.

	askunk, on 04/01/2008 @ 06:48 PM PST wrote:
		Everyone should be allowed to marry, regardless of preference, and refusing to acknowledge homosexual marriage is saying that it is not on the same level as heterosexual marriage.

	jabberwockzan, on 04/01/2008 @ 07:52 PM PST wrote:
		It is completely wrong to deny anyone the right to marry someone they love. Who cares if a man loves a man or a woman loves a woman? They aren't asking you to join them.. Just accept them.

	taunate, on 04/01/2008 @ 10:17 PM PST wrote:
		I agree, same sex marriage should be allowed. Quite frankly i don't understand why people get their panties all in a wad about it. Just because a bunch of bible thumpers say that its a sin? Don't we have MORE IMPORTANT ISSUES in the world!!!

	junctamox, on 04/01/2008 @ 10:28 PM PST wrote:
		Gay marriage is an EXTRA right, not an equal right. Either way, though, I think that government should get out of the business of marriage altogether. It's a religious institution; let churches decide whether they want to go against sound Biblical scripture and allow gay marriages.

	erlewine30, on 04/02/2008 @ 06:59 AM PST wrote:
		Ridiculous! Let's just end the whole battle and do away with marriage altogether. It has become a joke to most people anyway and all it is doing is feeding lawyers and destroying live of children who get trapped between parents, lawyers and court systems. Let's just do away with it and allow any two people to enter into a legal contract with predetermined settlements when you want out.

	SacMom, on 04/02/2008 @ 08:52 AM PST wrote:
		Marriage was invented to join a man and a woman together and for her to take his name and for the two to start a family. I don't think two men or two women need to get married, they can still be together forever if they want to and live together but there will never be a husband and a wife, or a bride and a groom in a same sex "marriage" so you really can't call it a marriage.

	halliseym, on 04/02/2008 @ 04:32 PM PST wrote:
		Why should we discriminate people because of their personal preferences? If they wan't to marry one of the same sex, why shouldn't they?

	mruby, on 04/03/2008 @ 12:38 PM PST wrote:
		I agree w/this letter completely.

	Kazuar, on 04/03/2008 @ 03:10 PM PST wrote:
		I don't understand the fuss about the word "marriage" being a solely heterosexual institution. It's a human institution.

	PoliScyra, on 04/03/2008 @ 10:05 PM PST wrote:
		"I couldn't disagree more." Unwarranted hate.

	SandynPaul, on 04/04/2008 @ 02:19 AM PST wrote:
		Give we the people the right. I am not sure why the majority thinks we need to tell the rest how to live when it isn't bothering us, hurting us, and actually costing us if one's marriage isn't legal in this case the one may have no health care coverage. Mind you they better speak english though and understand In God we trust, if we want, and pray and sit down and shut up then. IMHO

	bennyboy5768, on 04/04/2008 @ 06:05 PM PST wrote:
		I disagree 100%. Marriage is and will always be between a man and a woman. Anything other than they is just wrong.

	darthgumby, on 04/04/2008 @ 07:35 PM PST wrote:
		This issue has been strategically abused by politicians as a red herring, meant to distract and divide the people and sway votes. If someone was truly trying to protect the 'religious sanctity' of marriage, they would support civil unions. But most don't. Most sit in judgmental self-righteousness. The issue here is civil liberties, not religious institution. I am gay, and I don't want special rights, I want equal rights. (And, junctamox, it's not EXTRA rights, because you should have the right to marry a man, if you chose.) I don't need some back-wood politician like Gary George threatening me with "violent backlash" if I don't "SHUT UP." It's time we become united again, as a people, and focus on things that truly matter. Yes to equality. Yes to religious freedom. Yes to civil union.

	jewlee, on 04/04/2008 @ 07:50 PM PST wrote:
		I don't know that I'll ever understand the idea behind not supporting same sex marriages. I simply cannot understand how anyone could be so cruel to think that my rights and my (same sex) partner's rights are not as important as their own.

	kissmekate, on 04/04/2008 @ 11:27 PM PST wrote:
		I think it does confuse kids... not to mention dealing with the ridicule from their peers.

	itzjoeymac, on 04/05/2008 @ 08:45 AM PST wrote:
		Gay marriage should be legal only to the extent that they are allowed to have a marriage service in any church that will allow it. Gay couples are not 'entitled' to any government benefits and never will be.

	JM4Change, on 04/05/2008 @ 11:42 AM PST wrote:
		This is not a government issue. If two people want to enter into a civil union, then fine. If the state calls it marriage, then fine. Who cares? The marriage ceremony within a church is governed by that church, so if they don't want to perform gay marriages, they don't have to. It's not the government's job to enforce religious convictions, but rather to ensure the public good.

	jp1999, on 04/05/2008 @ 12:16 PM PST wrote:
		To a point...I have personal issues with same sex marriage. But, I wouldn't want you to push your beliefs on me. Just like you don't want me doing it to you.

	katskills29, on 04/06/2008 @ 10:28 AM PST wrote:
		This action is long overdue in the pursuit of equal rights for all. There is so much hatred in this world, and I believe that we should do whatever we can to promote what love still exists.

	pontific8, on 04/07/2008 @ 12:13 AM PST wrote:
		I'm really hoping that this next administration (whichever it may be) will finally take a stand and allow for same sex marriage. Love is love and claiming that gay people are trying to "hijack" the term marriage is just arguing semantics.

	starmode6, on 04/07/2008 @ 10:28 AM PST wrote:
		As a friend to a few Gay couples I have to say they deserve to have all the legal benefits I have with my wife.

	SOLOWPOET, on 04/07/2008 @ 08:26 PM PST wrote:
		marriage is a sacred event that should not be made a mockery of. To each his/her own as far as love goes but marriage is a set institution.

	Liquid88, on 04/08/2008 @ 01:01 PM PST wrote:
		Being a strait male I think that marriages should not be allowed between same sex couples. For centuries the world has seen marriage as a commitment between a man and woman whether by law, religion, or god depending on who you talk to and why should we allow this to be changed because a hand full of people say we are descriminating.

	hought41, on 04/08/2008 @ 01:57 PM PST wrote:
		Whether your straight or gay shouldn't matter, we're all human beings and should be able to marry any person we want.

	hollyoswalt, on 04/08/2008 @ 02:22 PM PST wrote:
		The legal rights associated with a legal union should be open to any couple, not just heterosexuals.

	Rockstar, on 04/08/2008 @ 03:20 PM PST wrote:
		If marriage was originally instituted for a man and a woman and then we allow "anyone who loves someone because it's their personal preference" to get married, whose to say, down the road, that people won't want to marry their dogs or who knows what else?

	JoeSapian, on 04/08/2008 @ 06:41 PM PST wrote:
		The content of my vote, and the inalineable rights granted me have nothing to do with what happens in my bed. I used to pee in my bed does that have make me less than you?

	ilovemeeps2, on 04/08/2008 @ 07:55 PM PST wrote:
		Marriage represents love, unity, and the knowledge that your loved one will be protected if something happened to you. For this reason, I agree with you!

	Megalomaniac, on 04/09/2008 @ 01:33 AM PST wrote:
		Only gays care about this issue. Since gays are the minority, It IS NOT a hot issue but rather a moot one. ..X..

	4hams, on 04/09/2008 @ 09:16 AM PST wrote:
		every person should be able to have the right to be married regardless of their sexual orientation. I pray that there will never be an amendment to the constitution that includes hate and discrimination.

	annielouwho, on 04/09/2008 @ 10:11 AM PST wrote:
		Protect the rights of Americans to run their own lives and choose their own mates. For the people, by the people, and of the people - not the straight people, the Christian people, but THE PEOPLE.

	RandyAggie, on 04/09/2008 @ 11:52 PM PST wrote:
		I agree with using the term "legal union" with all rights and responsibilities of marriage. Seems close enough.

	theladyinred, on 04/10/2008 @ 02:46 AM PST wrote:
		ok so who are we to say who anyone falls in love with!the bible is only taken to heart to those who believe and there should be a speration of church and state therefore marriage is a state issue since they are the ones who issue the paper word saying whether or not it is "recognized". and by saying it is not right to have a man and man or women and women marriage is like saying "because you are guy you can pray or come to our churchs". this country, though the youngest, was founded on equal rights FOR EVERYONE. when our familes came across the oceans they were in search of ewual rights and getting away from persecution. so would we not be doing the same to our own people and abandoning what we came here for by taking rights away from one group of people?

	Bracholi, on 04/10/2008 @ 06:49 AM PST wrote:
		By definition: the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. Keyword, religious. You can't force a church to marry a gay couple. That is the wording issue. It is an attempt (by former communist party members that have been heading up the gay rights assault (assault as in, forcing the issue upon an unwilling populace whilst deeming opposition as homophobic and/or confused) in an attempt to shut down our democracy internally. It's working, you fools eat it up. As long as marriage is a religious issue, it's not an issue of the state. To force it upon us as if an issue of state matters is not only unethical, it's dangerous to the very principals this Republic was founded upon. Accept civil unions, call it a marriage. Issue resolved.

	wiccankitty, on 04/10/2008 @ 09:57 AM PST wrote:
		I have to agree with AJ it is time to allow same sex marriage. We live in a world of diversity and we should embrace the different lifestyles in the world. I never really understood homophobia, just because two people are of the same sex that makes them unable to have a real marriage. Strange.

	SOLOMON504, on 04/10/2008 @ 08:12 PM PST wrote:
		SAME SEX MARRIAGE IS JUST PLAN AND SIMPLY NOT RIGHT,IT GOES AGAINST EVERYTHING WERE TOUGHT AS KIDS AND AS GOD FEARING HUMANS

	QueenOfTheCarnival, on 04/10/2008 @ 09:35 PM PST wrote:
		Anyone over 18 should have the right to say whom they want to marry regardless of sex. If animals were consenting, I would say it should be legal to marry one! Keep up the fight.

	Alandale, on 04/11/2008 @ 02:27 AM PST wrote:
		Absolutely. Two people should be able to do , love ,and provide for each other with all the rights of anyone

	carlyc07, on 04/11/2008 @ 11:28 AM PST wrote:
		While the letter is well written, you need to get your facts straight. Your letter reads, "The thrust of opposition to same sex marriage comes from the religious right." While most of the religious right does condemn same sex marriage, so do many other people from all walks of life. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Period.

	MotherGrizzly, on 04/11/2008 @ 11:52 AM PST wrote:
		I agree; the "religious right" is what is keeping us from evolving as a nation and accepting the fact that those in a homosexual relationship deserve equal right to marriage. "Marriage" should not be defined as gender specific, in my opinion.

	den23, on 04/11/2008 @ 02:15 PM PST wrote:
		If you want my REAL thoughts go to the letter titled "Abortion". Otherwise, I can just tell you that I believe it's their choice, and the government has nothing to do with it unless it wants do open a department that restricts peoples sexuality. I mean HONESTLY how can an orginization like the government tell you who to screw? PLEASE people get serious. P.S: I'm Straight.

	joey2dworld, on 04/12/2008 @ 06:00 AM PST wrote:
		Oh come on! If gays wanna get married, that is fine. But, they are entitled to no government benefits considering those benefits are designed to encourage actual families and not two people just living together. I guess me and my roommate should get those benefits too!

	shellylynn23, on 04/12/2008 @ 07:33 PM PST wrote:
		There are thousands of same sex couples that would like to be able to get married - and that vote. This is a human rights issue and should be treated with respect.

	mommajones, on 04/12/2008 @ 08:01 PM PST wrote:
		Very well said. Everyone that is a US Citizen has a right to love whomever they choose. Gender should not play a role in love. Whether you love a female or male is your own choice, not the government. They should be allowed to marry, have children, divorce just like the next couple. Why block it when its happening already? And just because the American's voted against it, doesnt matter. Over 50% of Americans voted to make marijuana for medical purposes legal, but the government won't do that, so why go by what a group of people want. Let everyone have their rights to marrigage.

	BellaMortis, on 04/12/2008 @ 10:24 PM PST wrote:
		I fully agree. Those against same-sex marriage generally forget that those of us who wish to be able to have them are only asking for equal rights. Today's marriages are basically civil unions, so either change it all to civil unions and keep a "marriage' in a church or allow 'marriage' to apply across the board. It DOESN'T hurt anyone.

	LauraMae, on 04/12/2008 @ 11:53 PM PST wrote:
		Same sex unions should not be allowed. It is an abomination. Disgusting. Please accept God's Will on this issue and let it go.

	phmcd, on 04/13/2008 @ 08:36 AM PST wrote:
		Marriage. Its not marriage. Its sex! they want everyone to think its about marriage.

	ramone_hamilton, on 04/13/2008 @ 10:41 AM PST wrote:
		To legitimize or legalize gay marriage would be one of the tragic moral losses of our generation. It would be a large sign that we have failed in our values as a country.

	4real, on 04/13/2008 @ 03:57 PM PST wrote:
		Let them marry. Gay people are usually more faithful and less abusive than straight people anyway. As long as they don't propose to you why are you bothering them and their rights? Instead of trying to keep gay people from marrying the straight women should think of ways to keep their husband from cheating and beating their A$$

	sahminiowa, on 04/13/2008 @ 03:58 PM PST wrote:
		My feelings on same sex marriage is if someone of the same sex wants to marry another of the same sex then LET THEM! It is there right and there business not the right wing religous fanatics out there business though they feel it is when it is not..They are not bothering you or harming you so leave them alone and i feel that in the history of this country it seems folks think they need to stick ones nose into things where it does not matter..God does not hate or disown anyone who is gay or marrys same sex..HE loves us all as he made us the way HE WANTED Not the way you wanted them...

	aquafitz, on 04/13/2008 @ 07:32 PM PST wrote:
		The problem with the "legal union" that previous commenters have suggested is that, though it technically gives gay unions the same rights as hetero marriages, it is fundamentally suggestive of institutionalised discrimination. Those who seem to think that simply limiting gay couples to civil unions is sufficient are essentially saying the same thing as segregationalists in the 1950s: separate, but equal.

	ninjanana15, on 04/13/2008 @ 07:52 PM PST wrote:
		The definition of marriage is the union between a man and a women therefore there can be no such thing as same sex marriages.After all God created Adam and Eve NOT Adam and Steve.

	moodysg, on 04/14/2008 @ 01:55 AM PST wrote:
		^God also didn't create the internet with which you seem so intent on spreading ignorance with. Better ban the internet. Marriage stopped being a religious institution when certain tax and insurance benefits became tied with it. To deny a couple benefits based on their sexual preference is tantamount to refusing to serve customers of a different race.

	melkisedeh, on 04/14/2008 @ 08:24 AM PST wrote:
		Marriage was always between a men and a women. Why to change this? Is is because the humans have 'evolved'? Where will this go?

	TLHE, on 04/14/2008 @ 07:39 PM PST wrote:
		Having read this and your letter in regards to abortion I believe I can safely say that we're very similar politically. Right on and all that! I just hope that the country is ready for the gay movement (though any movement will come with setbacks.)

	Markahorn, on 04/14/2008 @ 07:47 PM PST wrote:
		I'm sure same sex marriage is very important to you. But is it more important than ending the war? Or the fact than some inner city school systems only graduate 30% of their students.

	justonejake, on 04/14/2008 @ 07:51 PM PST wrote:
		Same-sex marriages? How about we just get rid of government intervention in marriages all together. Then it won't matter what they consider a marriage.

	darthgumby, on 04/14/2008 @ 08:04 PM PST wrote:
		Women were fighting for equal rights to vote at the same time as World War I, child labor, and escalating immigration and poverty. When is it ever the right time for blatant inequality?

	shanaeb, on 04/15/2008 @ 07:28 AM PST wrote:
		My religious beliefs interferes with this letter. No same sex couple should be allowed to get married. Being GAY has become a movement, the more we go along with this the more people all of a sudden are gay. Give me a break!!!!

	cousinsal, on 04/15/2008 @ 09:22 AM PST wrote:
		Homosexuals should be allowed to marry just as heterosexuals, since "civil unions" would mean a second-class citizenship. Why should they do something different, no matter the benefits being the same? If they are separated and gays cannot get "married", then we're saying they are not as valuable as straights. I don't believe that.

	sticktango, on 04/15/2008 @ 10:00 AM PST wrote:
		I couldn't agree more. It scares me that a number of states are passing bans on gay marriage. I think in most situations, most homosexuals are not looking to be "married" but are just asking for similar rights.

	k229, on 04/15/2008 @ 12:58 PM PST wrote:
		I agree that any person should be able to marry whom ever they choose. The Bill of Rights gives the right to happiness and if that makes you happy then it's okay.

	micklech, on 04/15/2008 @ 07:10 PM PST wrote:
		I agree with this letter that gay marriage has not had a politician that supports it or pushes for it. But i also disagree that this is a issue that can be looked at so in so many ways and it may be difficult to come to a mutual agreement between all states.

	funkedog, on 04/15/2008 @ 07:44 PM PST wrote:
		I have a hard time agreeing to the term marriage between 2 people of the same sex. Legal union- yes. Marriage underthe eyes of the Lord - no.

	spritelylite, on 04/15/2008 @ 07:46 PM PST wrote:
		This is an issue most likely to be resolved in the short term by individual states and private employers.

	glublahh, on 04/16/2008 @ 05:28 AM PST wrote:
		It is indeed religious influence which denies gay marriage, absolutely true. Marriage is a sacred union, beyond government ... although government too should not deny or approve of it. It is a sacred matter.

	cousinsal, on 04/17/2008 @ 07:48 AM PST wrote:
		It's NOT a religious thing - it's a civil rights issue. No church HAS to marry gays if they don't want to. But, it should be legal according to our laws of equality. It has nothing to do with religion.

	divka, on 04/17/2008 @ 11:52 AM PST wrote:
		People really need to find better things to worry about this election season than this issue. People who want to be married should be able to.

	samand, on 04/19/2008 @ 10:59 AM PST wrote:
		Some people think God made homosexuality, but first there was Adam. There wasn't even such a thing as sex between humans until God made Eve. Even then, there still wasn't another woman or another man around until they had children. So the first instance of homosexuality that could have possibly taken place would have had to been between Adam and his son or Even and her daughter. Anyone who thinks that was God's plan is messed up. Homosexuality is paramount to incest.

	familyman, on 04/19/2008 @ 02:38 PM PST wrote:
		Marriage is not a right, otherwise licenses would not be needed "permitting" two people to get married. Marriage consists of two people who meet the qualifications, applying for a permit from the state saying that they have the states permission to get married. When did rights require you to ask permission for participation?

	tmthomp3, on 04/20/2008 @ 10:19 AM PST wrote:
		Although I disagree with same sex marriage the constitution provides equal rights across the board to all citizens. I say if the constitution guarantees it we can not deny them their rights because of our personal beliefs

	Zenarchist, on 04/20/2008 @ 12:32 PM PST wrote:
		Seeing what married men and women have done to marriage I wonder why people would fight so hard to associate themselves as such. Now the rights afforded to married couples should be extend to any participants of any relationship no matter what it is called.

	msjbelle, on 04/20/2008 @ 12:46 PM PST wrote:
		Part of me says let them do what they want and the other part says the bible states it is wrong. Marriage is defined as between a man and a woman. Adam & Eve not Adam & Steve.

	angel2me, on 04/20/2008 @ 02:45 PM PST wrote:
		God instituted marriage and is the only one who can amend it. It is not up for public scrutiniy

	Apent, on 04/20/2008 @ 03:18 PM PST wrote:
		This is a very important issue and I definitly agree. Less than 50 years ago a black man and a white woman could not marry because it was believed to be immoral and degrading. This couldn't be further from the truth! Time will show that a marrying outside your sex is just as moral as marrying outside your race

	kfrase20, on 04/20/2008 @ 03:43 PM PST wrote:
		Thank you! This is a civil rights issue. Folks of the same sex who want to get married absolutely should have that right!

	ltroye, on 04/20/2008 @ 04:14 PM PST wrote:
		One of the most sacred creeds of this country is the separation of church and state. Same sex marriage does not hurt anyone, as long as you have the self-control to ignore it if it bothers you.

	mdizzle4, on 04/20/2008 @ 06:34 PM PST wrote:
		Why can't people let others live how the want? I agree with you 100%. I'm not gay, but if that's what makes someone else happy, so be it!

	japhy4529, on 04/20/2008 @ 08:30 PM PST wrote:
		I believe that anyone (that is not closely related to another individual) should be allowed to marry whomever they choose.

	Killabyte, on 04/20/2008 @ 09:13 PM PST wrote:
		I would hope, AJChambers, that the elected officials care more about serving the citizenry than their legacy. Here you suggest only to the future president to find himself on the "right" side of the issue, and to thus be judged well by history. Fortunately, while many judges are difficult to ouster for trying to rule according to their own agendas, and many of these judges are appointed for life, or significant terms, most of our officials are elected and have to please the populace. Employment discrimination is wrong. Hate crimes are wrong. But to legitimize "marriage" between same sex couples isn't something this country needs or wants.

	DeadGrrl, on 04/20/2008 @ 10:09 PM PST wrote:
		It's like i always say, if the population really wants homosexuals to stop having sex, then pass the law that allows them to get married. it's not going to affect anyone but the couple so why is there so much controversy? is it not christian enough for the U.S? seriously....

	BobF, on 04/21/2008 @ 04:01 PM PST wrote:
		Your argument begins with a basic fallacy- that homosexuality is equal to a persons ethnic background/race and should be considered a "protected class" of Americans. Rather than giving additional rights gays to marry, why don't we give elementary school childrenand their parents the right not to be indoctrinated by a homosexual activists and agendas in our schools. By the way, a majority of American's do not support a homosexuals right to marry, not just the religious right.

	RubyTwilight, on 04/21/2008 @ 04:07 PM PST wrote:
		I don't understand the argument from some people who say that same-sex marriage threatens the sanctity of marriage. How? Because it's different? With the divorce rate as it is and numerous "hey, let's go on tv and find a wife/husband" reality shows, the argument that same-sex marriage threatens the sanctity of marriage seems a bit silly to me. What's so bad about having gay people get married? Honestly, I cannot see where that should be a problem. I think that homosexual individuals should have every single right that I do. It seems sad to me that not everyone feels the same way.

	magikid, on 04/22/2008 @ 06:54 PM PST wrote:
		Marriage is just a word. Agree of not with homosexuality, the issue of "marriage" is only an issue because people continue to give power to the word.

	DiamondLil, on 04/22/2008 @ 10:15 PM PST wrote:
		There must be an acknowledgment of the distinction between marriage as a religious ceremony and a civil union or the legal aspect of a married couple. The religious right confuses the two. The civil joining of two people who love each other in a legal sense should be something available to anyone, regardless of sexual preference. The religious ceremony, which seems to be the primary issue of contention of the conservative right, should not be governed but should be chosen by the individuals participating.

	Brianetics, on 04/24/2008 @ 11:33 PM PST wrote:
		If this is a democracy, I say let the people speak and abide by that decision.

	lectersmeal, on 04/25/2008 @ 04:36 PM PST wrote:
		Of course the right of homosexuals should be protected. And there should be some sort of legal document involved for committed couples. Maybe we want to give it another name than "marriage," for all the religious folks... but something needs to be changed.

	wormbutt, on 04/25/2008 @ 08:36 PM PST wrote:
		Why is it when people don't get their way, they cry discrimination? It isn't always about discrimination. This letter is another example. It isn't a discrimination issue here. What's wrong with legal union? If you don't like the term, find something snazzy to start calling it, but don't cry foul because you can't weasel in on another group's celebration.

	samantha_scott30, on 04/25/2008 @ 11:40 PM PST wrote:
		Americans are promised the rights of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." But apparently that clause doesn't apply if one happens to be gay. Any ideological argument to the contrary is based purely on religion; does anyone happen to recall that little old thing called separation of church and state? All Americans deserve the right to love and marry their soulmate, regardless of their sexual orientation. Equality now!

	qtkleee151, on 04/26/2008 @ 07:50 AM PST wrote:
		Having a gay mother, whom I completely support, I definetly believe gay marriage should be allowed, and the GLBT community should be given just as much rights!

	rysmom, on 04/26/2008 @ 05:27 PM PST wrote:
		The crux of the issue, to me, is that our laws are so unfair to gay couples. The cry of The American Revolution was, "No taxation without representation!" Yet, even in 2008, gay couples pay up to 40% more in taxes simply because they're gay. Where is their "equal protection under the law"? Doesn't the Bill of Rights apply to gays? As far as the term "marriage", Webster's defines this as either the union of opposite sex OR same-sex couples. The spin stops here.

	honeycakes, on 04/28/2008 @ 03:47 AM PST wrote:
		Treating people like second-class citizens because they enjoy companionship with the opposite sex is archaic and judgmental. Why can't we treat people like equals?

	ZaLyd, on 04/28/2008 @ 08:25 AM PST wrote:
		I support the right of the pursuit of happiness. My happiness may not be with a same sex partner, but it is not my place to decide what makes another person happy. I have friends who love their partner as much, if not more, than I love my spouse. They should have the right to marry and have the legal recognition that marriage would give them.

	rejuvantedone, on 04/28/2008 @ 03:44 PM PST wrote:
		personally i am straight so lets get that out in the open, but i want to say i think if you truly end up with someone that truly makes you happy than y not. Those who don't agree with gay rights are just homophobs and it disgust them to see. Yes i would rather them keep their business outside the public eye, but if there happy with each other than they should be together. Gay straight, by its all the same now, lol. Its the new milenium as said in jay and silentbob strike back!

	bird, on 04/29/2008 @ 02:26 PM PST wrote:
		i feel like such a girl right now, but the comments on here truly made me cry. i don't understand people who oppose it because "thats the way things are." as a bisexual in a very serious relationship with another woman, i can't imagine being denied marriage just because our love isn't conventional, just because marriage between a same-sex couple is "just wrong."

	timwiley, on 04/29/2008 @ 08:32 PM PST wrote:
		I agree with every this letter says 100%. As a straight male, I believe that it is everyone's right to be treated the exact same as everyone else, regardless of their sexual orientation. I hope our politicians can make progress towards equal rights between everyone.

	kararobinette, on 04/29/2008 @ 09:05 PM PST wrote:
		I don't understand why some are opposed to gay marriage yet support the concept of civil unions with the same legal implications? Is the concept of marriage in a traditional sense not already redefined by current society? I don't see the difference by allowing two people who care about each other to get married but that's my personal view...

	d_kenney, on 04/29/2008 @ 10:06 PM PST wrote:
		Homosexuals can adopt children together, and are protected by law from discrimination in the workplace, as well as from many other types of discrimination. So, why are they being discriminated against in this case? And how does this affect transsexuals, transgenders, and so on? If a man has surgery to become a woman, and lives as a woman, can he marry a man then? Or will we soon have to disclose our medical histories to get married as well? If that's the case, then will the physically impaired be next to be banned from marriage? It is no different than saying that poor people can't get married, or only Christians can get married. The fact that same-sex marriage has become such a "hot button issue" is ridiculous to me. It is nobody's business who someone else chooses to love and marry, so get over it and give these people their rights like everyone else.

	j2n2, on 05/01/2008 @ 07:21 AM PST wrote:
		This letter is 100% right on. I like to say gay is the new black. Gay rights is truly the civil rights movement of the present time and needs to be embraced. Let's move toward a future of equality for all men and women, regardless of age, gender, race, religion, or sexual orientation.

	griffy, on 05/01/2008 @ 11:53 AM PST wrote:
		Gays and Lesbians should absolutely be entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals. The time is here.

	XaoticInfection, on 05/01/2008 @ 05:29 PM PST wrote:
		Using the term marriage over civil union is a question of principle. These homosexual couples want to be taken just as seriously as same sex married couple, and I am sorry but the term civil union just does not strike serious to a lot of people. Plus, what is wrong with them having a "marriage" how does it hurt you at all?

	Lucretia722, on 05/02/2008 @ 12:17 AM PST wrote:
		You should always be honest toyourself. If one opposes same-sex marrige, they should stick to just that.

	missna, on 05/02/2008 @ 09:32 AM PST wrote:
		Same sex marraiges corrupt society and just overall disrupt the natural order of things.

	renee6213, on 05/02/2008 @ 11:37 AM PST wrote:
		Who are we to judge anyone. It does not effect my life whatsoever if two men or women marry anymore than if a man or woman marries. I couldn't agree more with this letter.

	Winston, on 05/02/2008 @ 08:02 PM PST wrote:
		Why should the government decide who can marry and who can't? Shouldn't it be up to the people involved? Why do you care what they do?

	Cammeel1, on 05/03/2008 @ 02:49 PM PST wrote:
		Although I am personally repulsed by two men who love each other, they are not interferring in my life, why should I interfer in theirs? They are an American citizen with rights that need to be and should be upheld.

	texpatriate, on 05/05/2008 @ 08:40 PM PST wrote:
		I will say that recognizing same-sex marriage doesn't seem to have the potential to mess up the legal system--I asked two lawyer friends and they both said the same thing.

	Simplyme, on 05/06/2008 @ 02:10 AM PST wrote:
		It is 2008 and time to let the discrimination end. There is no reason that it should not be a live and let live world. It concerns me that as a free country why some peoples rights are limited when it is in no way detrimental to my health or anyone else's.

	Bees, on 05/06/2008 @ 12:21 PM PST wrote:
		At this point, hetero marriage is often pretty degraded. I don't see any reason why homosexuals should not enjoy the same options wrg tax benefits etc. And the church is not the only office that will marry people- don't forget City Hall. We aren't all religious to begin with.

	racyrefinedraj, on 05/06/2008 @ 09:48 PM PST wrote:
		I like your spirit, but I'm really frustrated with attempts to create "'s law." Why does every law need to be attached to a touchy-feely story? It seems like it detracts from the rational discourse?

	racyrefinedraj, on 05/06/2008 @ 09:52 PM PST wrote:
		To those who disagree with this letter, I have one question: If I'm a gay american, and I decide to marry my partner, how exactly does it hurt you and/or infringe on any of your rights?

	ummhafsa, on 05/07/2008 @ 09:51 PM PST wrote:
		IMHO, The definition of marriage occurs between a man and a woman. Marriage is sanctioned as a contract in the eyes of god to procreate, love, honor and support. Anything else is an affair and falls under the choice of those two people. But don't call it marriage.

	Rocky45, on 05/07/2008 @ 11:42 PM PST wrote:
		Marriage, by definition, is a union between a man and a woman for the purpose of sexual fidelity and reproduction. It's the smallest unit of society. Instead of 'marriages' or 'unions', there should be a 'next of kin' option for those who wish to make their current lover their heir and decision maker.

	oreofudge, on 05/08/2008 @ 06:46 PM PST wrote:
		I understand that the term "marriage" is rooted in religion and thus I bow to their 'right' to try to define and protect it; however, the idea of marriage is not religious nor has it only been applicable to heterosexual partnerships. Historically, these legal unions were made between men and women, men and men, men and multiple women, even between cousins. The concept of marriage began as a tool to unite people and communties so that they all may prosper. Now, we are denying these legal unions just has we denied African Americans their basic human rights. What if in 40 years a new religion became mainstream that claimed heterosexuality is a sin? If you were heter, how would you feel?

	asdfasas, on 05/09/2008 @ 09:22 PM PST wrote:
		Well, homosexuals are allowed to have "civil unions" in many states, and this provides many of the same benefits of marriage. I believe that most of the furor over gay marriage comes from the terminology: many people don't want to associate the word "marriage" with gay people.

	JesusJones, on 05/10/2008 @ 12:58 AM PST wrote:
		I'm a liberal, but I think we should leave marriage to the religious right. Give the gays the same rights as married couples if they're in a civil union and call it a day.

	sunday702, on 05/11/2008 @ 07:54 PM PST wrote:
		I cant believe this is such a big deal. Just let everyone marry who ever they want aslong as there of concenting age.Didn't any one hear if you dont like dont look. its not hurting anyone

	vsmith, on 05/12/2008 @ 02:42 PM PST wrote:
		Why is there such concern about the term marriage? Why does it matter what it is called? If two people love each other, why is it any of our business if they are gay or not?

	Shay77, on 05/12/2008 @ 03:59 PM PST wrote:
		What I'd like to know is, where do homosexual advocates such as the ACLU, intend to draw the line? Many of the "liberal left" (in response to the "religious right" terminology) claim that their sexual preference should be tolerated, even promoted and rewarded by allowing them to marry and obtain the same benefits as hetersexual couples. But isn't it just that....sexual PREFERENCE? In which case, isn't allowing someone with a homosexual preference to marry in essence opening Pandora's Box? What about adults with a sexual preference toward children? It's absurd to think about. But then again, so was the idea of homosexual marriage a few decades ago. How did we get so far off track?

	nboot23, on 05/12/2008 @ 04:06 PM PST wrote:
		As far as I'm concerned, marriage is a religious institution and it should have remained that way. Unfortunately we now legislate marriage, which is essentially based on religion. If people want to get married, it should be between them and their preacher/rabbi/etc. It's not fair to give benefits to heterosexuals yet deny those benefits to homosexuals. If gay marriage is opposed because a person says it's against their religion, we oughta just keep it out of the government completely.

	g_richards, on 05/12/2008 @ 04:39 PM PST wrote:
		Discriminating against same sex marriage will eventually be judged in the same vein as discriminating against women and blacks. These marriages should be allowed.

	liberty4all, on 05/13/2008 @ 04:53 AM PST wrote:
		Why is marriage a term only heterosexual couples can use? Why is it considered hijacking for homosexual couples to use the same term for the same relationship? The difference between heterosexual and homosexual couples does not mean one relationship is more valid than the other and to assume so is very naive. Yes, this is a governmental issue because currently the government is restricting it. The government already meddles with issues that ought not to be at the governmental level, so why not let them meddle with an issue that ought to be. Kudos to this citizen!

	cazandria, on 05/13/2008 @ 01:27 PM PST wrote:
		You know what the most ridiculous thing is? Right wingers saying that if we allow a man to marry a man, or a woman a woman, that people will start wanting to marry their pets. Guess what? Animals can't sign legal contracts. Two legitimate american citizens have the right to a marriage.

	wizdoom, on 05/13/2008 @ 03:27 PM PST wrote:
		Why should anyone have a problem when two people want to live together, be it homo or heterosexual.

	wizdoom, on 05/13/2008 @ 03:36 PM PST wrote:
		Why should anyone have a problem when two people want to live together, be it homo or heterosexual.

	Jules1227, on 05/13/2008 @ 08:40 PM PST wrote:
		I do not think that we should mix religious and legal matters - marriage between gays does not hurt anyone. I have a close relationship with God, but He does not ask me to judge anyone, in fact, He asks me not to - God will judge in the end. This is a secular issue and one that should remain so.

	cupid, on 05/14/2008 @ 05:07 AM PST wrote:
		Its a free country, then why restrictions. Everyone should be able to make their own choices. Lets not stop anyone from doing what they want to do.

	mountainmom, on 05/15/2008 @ 10:50 AM PST wrote:
		I have always been brought up to believe that this is wrong. I am not for gay/lesbian marriages and to me it is not the same as having a man and woman marry.

	jovnyc, on 05/15/2008 @ 11:39 AM PST wrote:
		I disagree with the same sex marriage for reasons of tradition and family stability. However, I would favor legislation that would allow two people ,who are not able to get married, the power of attorney for each other. I don't think this should hinge on what type of sex they are having. For instance, this would allow an unmarried daughter to have her elderly mother on her employer's insurance.

	whisk666, on 05/16/2008 @ 02:41 AM PST wrote:
		I'm still waiting to hear one legitimate example given of how same sex marriage might somehow harm the institute of marriage. How is marriage hijacked just because a ceremony is performed between two people of the same sex? Shouldn't marriage be about love, and nothing more?

	Erin285, on 05/16/2008 @ 02:27 PM PST wrote:
		I agree, I am all for allowing homosexual marrages. I am not homosexual, but why would any straight perosn be againest it? Allowing homosexuals to marry will not affect a straight persons life. Let them do what they want, as long as a couple in consenting adults I ahve no problem with them.

	jehb, on 05/17/2008 @ 05:19 PM PST wrote:
		I don't think same sex marriage is just about protecting the rights of homosexuals, though. It's about preserving the rights and civil liberties of all of us in an increasingly restrictive world.

	SWIFFJUSTICE, on 05/20/2008 @ 05:59 PM PST wrote:
		The folks involved in these same sex marriages will be scrutinized enough by the average onlooker so i guess they may as well have the right to be legit.

	Edaun24, on 05/20/2008 @ 08:33 PM PST wrote:
		When thinking about the topic of same-sex marriage, I can't help but think of every American's right to the "pursuit of happiness." Who is the government to say who can and cannot be married? What happened to the separation of church and state? I think there are much more important and pressing issues that need to be addressed, such as the economy and Iraq war, and the government should stop trying to outlaw gay marriages. Since it is a religious topic, I think it should be up to the specific church whether or not they are willing to marry homosexuals.

	seatlesiri, on 05/20/2008 @ 10:59 PM PST wrote:
		The psyche of the homosexuals needs to be considered as well as their feelings and given rights

	Karmen0225, on 05/21/2008 @ 09:41 PM PST wrote:
		While I do agree with legalizing same sex marriage, I do worry about it becoming a focus issue. I know that in the past the right has played on peoples negative feelings about the issue to deflect attention from issues that have are of a more pressing concern. The issue itself should be a no brainer, but people blow it out of proportion.

	darthgumby, on 05/21/2008 @ 09:47 PM PST wrote:
		There's lots of people touting family, and tradition... female genital mutilation, preference for sons (to the point of killing female newborns), marrying daughters at a young age, forced marriages... these are long-standing, extant traditions. Do they improve society? No. They are harmful, some even violent. So, considering that traditions merit scrutiny, and that marriage is also a government institution, the right should be extended to all or none.

	empressofanime, on 05/22/2008 @ 08:28 AM PST wrote:
		I agree, I don't see why any two people on love, who have made a lifelong commitment to each other should not be afforded the same rights. As for those who say it harms the "marriage", doesn't the US divorce rate do that already?

	yumyumkibble, on 05/22/2008 @ 11:26 AM PST wrote:
		The exclusion of certain groups from the institution of marriage is inconsistent with principles that this country was built on. This is a civil right issue. Religion should not play a part. It's simply bigotry.

	cmlm02, on 05/22/2008 @ 12:29 PM PST wrote:
		Live and let live - why is this such a polarizing issue for so many? Look at the rest of the Western world - they are way ahead of us on this.

	amanda, on 05/22/2008 @ 12:53 PM PST wrote:
		I agree 100% with this open letter. I hope that our next President is enlightened enough to support gay issues.

	pryncessamber78, on 05/23/2008 @ 07:26 AM PST wrote:
		i disagree with this letter. people have the freedom to life their lives as they choose to. everyone deserves equally rights regardless of their decisions.

	justme4266, on 05/23/2008 @ 01:10 PM PST wrote:
		Thank you for a well-written letter on this very timely subject. For those who object to gays using the term "marriage", do you have a valid reason? Marriage is a union both emotionally and financially joining two people together as one - where in the definition does it specify gender?

	Celestial, on 05/24/2008 @ 10:47 AM PST wrote:
		Since I am not gay, I don't have as strong as an opinion on this issue as I might otherwise. But having said that, there is no reason NOT to allow same-sex marriages. The only reason people come up with is by trying to pass it off as something immoral. Well, since when has morality ever been the job of the courts? Separation of Church and State is the answer. Get married and prosper!

	EMLazzarin, on 05/24/2008 @ 08:22 PM PST wrote:
		I am strongly in favor of same-sex marriage and homosexual rights, but also believe that it is a state, not federal, issue.

	MoonAssassin, on 05/24/2008 @ 11:10 PM PST wrote:
		I believe that same-sex marriage should be allowed. It is wrong to say that everyone is not equal based on their sexual preferences. I firmly agree with this letter when it states "great social progress is very possible" for homosexual marriages!

	SUFFERERSO, on 05/27/2008 @ 10:39 AM PST wrote:
		Although i don't personally agree with the gay lifestyle i agree even less with the fist of dictatorship that some governments try to quietly wield . Let them marry.

	jlaney, on 05/28/2008 @ 01:33 PM PST wrote:
		The continued slide towards an anything goes morality in this country will eventually leave us with a morally bankrupt citizenry. We must draw the line of political correctness somewhere.

	micheleh4p9, on 05/28/2008 @ 02:32 PM PST wrote:
		I agree that people should have the right to marry whomever they fall in love with. I don't believe it threatens my rights as a straight individual in any way if the same-sex marriage law is passed.

	goldfish79, on 05/28/2008 @ 02:39 PM PST wrote:
		Human rights are being violated when you deny homosexuals the right to marry. There are massive amounts of evidence that homosexuality is as "normal" as heterosexuality. If you deny homosexuals the right to marry based on the premise that they can not reproduce, then you are saying that infertile, elderly, or couples who do not wish to have children have to right to marry. It's absolute insanity!

	n_baker, on 05/29/2008 @ 12:35 AM PST wrote:
		marriage is for a man and a woman. i highly disagree with this article. i wonder what kind of message we are sending to our children by taking a ceremony that has been practiced a certain way for thousands of years and desecrating it in this fashion.

	moonchyldfyre, on 05/29/2008 @ 06:10 AM PST wrote:
		I agree that same sex couple should be allowed to get married. However, what I don't like are when same sex couples throw it in your face like they got one up.

	SAW5020, on 05/30/2008 @ 11:08 PM PST wrote:
		If it does not hurt you then keep your nose out of it. Why is it alright to bypass their rights because of our preferences? What's next no green veggies on wednesdays. (yeah that's right it is just ridiculous}

	cbburke1116, on 06/09/2008 @ 10:28 AM PST wrote:
		The reason why most states only recognize marriage between a man and a woman is because its what is best for society. Society encourges marriage because it leads to population growth.

	luna_riviera, on 06/10/2008 @ 12:44 AM PST wrote:
		I agree with this letter completely and am a bit disturbed by the comments I'm seeing. Gays are hijacking the term marriage? Leave marriage to the heteros? Marriage is an EXTRA right? How would gay marriage make a mockery of straight marriage? These comments are just awful.

	OrdinaryName, on 06/10/2008 @ 02:51 AM PST wrote:
		I am for the recognizing of the rights of same sex couples whether it be through civil unions or same sex marriages. The United States recognized marriage certificates of any country outside its borders regardless of the requirements - minimum age, etc, why don't we afford the same consideration to our own states who make the decision to allow same sex couples to wed? It Biblical times, it was an admonition to keep the faith alivew- after all, you wouldn't produce many more of the Chosen if the couples we all monogamous and of the same sex.

	coldfire101, on 06/10/2008 @ 12:53 PM PST wrote:
		I don't have any issues with it and believe that it should be allowed. If two people are committed to one another, gender should not matter. It is obvious that the traditional family values in the world aren't working any better....so, live and let live. I'd rather see a same sex couple madly in love raising a child, then a violent man/women household. It is time for us humans to choose love over our personal beliefs of what is right and wrong.

	JDog, on 06/11/2008 @ 07:00 PM PST wrote:
		Coldfire101 - So if a man "loves" his dog and want to "marry" it/him/her, should we allow it? You may think this is an absolutely absurd question, but fifty years from now it may not be. After all, if you were to go back 50 years, 99% of people would have thought it absolutely absurd for same sex couples to marry. So should we allow an animal/human "marriage"? Just because more and more people accept something as tolerable, doesn't make it right.

	hoppingviola, on 06/13/2008 @ 03:49 PM PST wrote:
		Homosexuality so often comes down to fear, doesn't it? It's a real shame.

	lizzy, on 06/13/2008 @ 04:13 PM PST wrote:
		I agree. I don't think Obama is as vocal on gay rights as Hilary. I hope he takes a strong stand on this.

	CYCLOPS, on 06/17/2008 @ 06:46 AM PST wrote:
		"Civil Union" instead? Haven't we learned? (Separate but equal). First of all, there are two different kinds of marriage, civil and religious. Nobody is lobbying for religious marriage. If a religion wants to perform marriages for same-sex couples, that is their decisions. LGBT people simply want the same treatment as others. They are not second-class citizens and do not deserve second-class rights.

	tennansm, on 06/17/2008 @ 06:56 AM PST wrote:
		I agree completely, this is an issue of equal rights. When you don't stand for the rights of everyman you lose them for all.

	bigsoonerfan07, on 06/17/2008 @ 08:02 AM PST wrote:
		SAME SEX MARRIAGE IS WRONG!! end of discussion.... it was MAN and WOMAN not MAN AND MAN or WOMAN and WOMAN!! you are messing with nature get a clue

	Nyx710, on 06/17/2008 @ 10:36 AM PST wrote:
		I am not particularly fond of the ways, or wording rather, you chose to express your opinions. I am an avid believer in marriages being a union of love - not a penis and vagina. In the past it has been of great importance to seperate the church from the state and I feel this is of great importance still. There are so many who protest the idea of homosexual marriages based on their religious beliefs or their outright uncomfort with the idea. Try this on for size, "You are a beautiful women. Your husband is a fat cow. I know you love him but I just cannot allow you to marry. It makes me uncomfortable." The idea of banning gay marriages is just as bogus as that statement. Marriage is a lifelong union between lovers - regardless of sex. Perhaps if this were taken into consideration the national divorce rate wouldn't be so obsurd. Just a thought. - Nyx710

	ashez143, on 06/17/2008 @ 11:02 AM PST wrote:
		I think everyone should be allowed to marry who they want. Love is blind....you can't help who you fall in love with.

	beautiest1, on 06/17/2008 @ 01:37 PM PST wrote:
		Same sex marriage is still wrong. No matter which state is allowing the "union" of such. It is biologically incorrect, it serves no reproductive purpose therefore it is physically inappropriate.

	Meregan22, on 06/17/2008 @ 02:14 PM PST wrote:
		Every person should have equal rights. Gay people have done nothing wrong. They don't hurt anyone and how ridiculous it is for people to keep them from showing their love and maintaining equal rights.

	katelynind, on 06/17/2008 @ 07:06 PM PST wrote:
		How will same sex marriages affect the life of the average heterosexual couple? Oh, that's right, it won't. It's sad that in the 21st century, some peoples opinions are so archaic.

	rockbirdstar, on 06/17/2008 @ 07:17 PM PST wrote:
		I'm all for what you've said. And in responce to some of the commenters below, a 'legal union' with all the rights and responcibilities of marriage is exactly the same as the 'separate but equal' educational system found by the supreme court to be so painfully inequal in their momentus Brown v. Topeka Board of Education decision. If civil unions were to be equal to marriage, how would you feel if your heterosexual marriage were being called a civil union? Not quite so equal on the other side, is it?

	jackie21, on 06/17/2008 @ 07:30 PM PST wrote:
		Gay, Straight , bi-sexual or whatever! I don't feel like anyone really takes marriage seriously anymore! So why not legalize Homosexual unions? The majority of the public against gay marriage has been divorced or has been married more than once. Maybe we should pass a law that says you can only legally get married one time!

	crickt1, on 06/17/2008 @ 07:59 PM PST wrote:
		I don't understand why it is anyone elses business if a man wants to marry a man or a woman wants to marry a woman. Is it harming you?

	LoganTyler, on 06/17/2008 @ 10:50 PM PST wrote:
		I feel as though everyone should be allowed to be married. Especially when some benefits can't be given to people in "Legal unions" but only to people who are married.

	samtaro, on 06/18/2008 @ 12:15 PM PST wrote:
		Same sex marriage should be legal. Love is love, any way you look at it. Who says the love of a lesbain couple is better than the love my husband and I have for each other, simply because we can procreate! Bravo on this letter.

	Andyman2020, on 06/18/2008 @ 12:35 PM PST wrote:
		Abortion rights? Dont you mean killing an unborn child? I have no problem with there being some kind of union so they can get tax breaks and such but to call it a marriage is just wrong

	Lapis320, on 06/18/2008 @ 01:10 PM PST wrote:
		I am a heterosexual female, but I have a few homosexual friends...both men and women. I am all for seeing my friends marry each other if they want to spend the rest of their lives together. Love is Love. No matter what gender you are.

	ccsm, on 06/18/2008 @ 01:52 PM PST wrote:
		If marriage was supposed to be between other than a man and a woman - then why can only a man + woman = new baby? Some male/female couples cannot have kids for medical reasons but a male/male or female/female can Never naturally "make" a child.

	chimmychonga, on 06/18/2008 @ 02:26 PM PST wrote:
		Marriage is not a "right", however when the ability to do so is taken away by the government I can only call that inequality.

	LanaMarlyce, on 06/18/2008 @ 06:07 PM PST wrote:
		I believe that homsexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals and gay marraige is legal in California now

	jennyibanez, on 06/18/2008 @ 09:36 PM PST wrote:
		I have mixed feelings about this letter, if you are allowed to have the same rights, whats so bad about being called a civil union....it's just a name tag...all i would be worried about was be able to be with that person in the eyes of the law and for insurance and family purposes, know what I mean. If gay people want to get married, let them, they have a right to be miserable like the rest of the married population.

	Boylen33, on 06/19/2008 @ 02:39 PM PST wrote:
		Where is HIV most prevalent in our country? In the homosexual population. Just because they are allowed to be married doesn't mean they will have sex with just each other. They will condone an open relationship and continue the spread of nastiness.

	Repoman007, on 06/19/2008 @ 07:12 PM PST wrote:
		I agree on same sex marriages. Anyone who is in love should be able to marry.

	fatimah, on 06/19/2008 @ 07:54 PM PST wrote:
		don't think two men or two women need to get married, they can still be together forever if they want to and live together but there will never be a husband and a wife, or a bride and a groom in a same sex "marriage" so you really can't call it a marriage.

	imaforevergirl, on 06/20/2008 @ 12:27 PM PST wrote:
		go GAYS!!!!!!!! i love my gays!! you should all be allowed to do what the rest of us do..if you dont like gays..go kick a bucket

	ninjanana15, on 06/20/2008 @ 01:42 PM PST wrote:
		1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law ..... right out of the dictionary.There is no such thing as a "marriage" between 2 men or 2 women,the Bible says "it is an abonination to God and He cannot look upon it."So you tell Him it's okay.Never has been never will be.Why do you think God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah?Read the book people.

	rubixcubix, on 06/20/2008 @ 04:55 PM PST wrote:
		For those who think that the main concern is the 'hijacking of the term marriage' you might want to reconsider who the term is being hijacked from. Marriage historically was viewed as a business transaction, the merging of families and assets. Only in recent society has it become more than that, extending into an expression of love. If you think that marriage is something done 'before god' and that it is tied to religion then you are suffering from an illusion. If you dont approve of gay marriage from a religions point of view then join a church that doesn't perform them. But your religions beliefs should not be pressed onto others in the form of a law. There is legal no reason gay couples should not be allowed to get married.

	morningfluff, on 06/20/2008 @ 07:42 PM PST wrote:
		It does make me sick that once a again this marriage issue will push hundreds of thousands of irrational people to vote who otherwise would have stayed home.

	soulja222, on 06/21/2008 @ 11:53 AM PST wrote:
		First and foremost, marriage, in its most basic form is a union of two under God, what business does the state have telling people about that?

	krsta007mill, on 06/21/2008 @ 01:52 PM PST wrote:
		I agree with this author. The only way that homosexuals will receive equal rights throughout the country is through the supreme court.

	graceofgod1976, on 06/22/2008 @ 06:43 PM PST wrote:
		I don't agree with any form of discrimination but Gay marriage is not the answer.

	womynadvocate, on 06/23/2008 @ 10:26 AM PST wrote:
		I agree with you! Everyone in this country (and the world) should have the right to get married if they so choose. Similar to your questioning the presidential nominees I have yet to see anyone take a firm stance either for or against same sex/gender marriage.

	bethalina, on 06/23/2008 @ 11:56 AM PST wrote:
		I have had a difficult time understanding the significant backlash against gay marriage in a country founded upon the idea of freedom...

	damion22, on 07/04/2008 @ 09:38 AM PST wrote:
		All people have the right to marry. God loves us all and in this crazy world we need to be happy as long as we aren't hurting others.

	PCWaitress, on 07/10/2008 @ 11:39 AM PST wrote:
		The same argument could be used for pologamy. Why should the government say that marriage to multiple partners is wrong? Especially if we claim to have "religious freedom." If we allow for these alternate lifestyles, the definition of marriage will continue to be farther from the truth: one man and one woman. Call them what you want, civil unions, etc. but keep "marriage" what it has been. Besides, even by the very selection of the word "gay" or "homosexual," (i.e. a "gay club")they've defined themselves as separate. I could want to be part of the daughters of the american revolution, but if I am not, I wouldn't expect them to change their defintion on my behalf.

	rebecca9588, on 07/14/2008 @ 09:28 PM PST wrote:
		Marriage by definition is a union between man and woman. I would not support and would personally work strongly against anyone who was to be elected and was for this issue. It is just wrong.

	AnneNonnimus, on 07/16/2008 @ 12:48 PM PST wrote:
		I am so angered by this topic, but no I am not a homophobe. Marriage is for one woman and one man, done. You can't throw the equal rights expression around as if you are being violated. A pervert wants the right to marry a 12 year old girl he truly is in love with - are you going to push for that "right" too?

	smb3235, on 07/18/2008 @ 12:57 PM PST wrote:
		"The thrust of opposition to same sex marriage comes from the religious right." Is correct!!!

	Boobelle, on 07/22/2008 @ 11:08 PM PST wrote:
		I wrote a paper about this for my legal rhetoric class, and while I'm not homosexual myself, and I really had no prior opinion about the issue, it would appear that precedence supports gay marriage more so than not.

	monnierobyn, on 08/01/2008 @ 12:13 AM PST wrote:
		This is exactly the problem: "The thrust of opposition to same sex marriage comes from the religious right." While those practicing religion that opposes gay marriage have the right to do so, I also have the right NOT to. Why should I be limited because of someone else's religious beliefs?

	amusing817, on 08/01/2008 @ 03:20 PM PST wrote:
		People that love each other should be allowed to get married. Heterosexuals aren't doing a very good job with the whole marriage thing, with a divorce rate of over 50%. Look at all the child abuse, and spouse abuse, within heterosexual marriage. Is that how things are "supposed" to be? Is that the "natural" order of things? Spare me.

	sacul555, on 08/03/2008 @ 06:43 PM PST wrote:
		Really i could care less what you call a union between two of the same sex. A homosexual couple deserves the exact same legal recognition as a "straight" couple does. That's where it ends though with legal rights. Past legal rights it is up to individual institutions weather they wish to allow a union in their place of residence (as in the government can't for a church to allow a same sex marriage to take place in it)

	p3000, on 08/10/2008 @ 03:14 PM PST wrote:
		Sometimes, I am a little puzzled that so many gay people want to take advantage of marriage these days. I thought the “social construction” of marriage, with its oppressive expectation of monogamy, etc., was anti-same sex ideology in disguise. Is this perhaps why so few gay couples actually take advantage of gay marriage when it is available?

	krisxrtb, on 08/13/2008 @ 08:59 PM PST wrote:
		Although I think the government should have nothing to do with marraige, the fact that it does should provide reason enough that gays should have every right regarding marraige (and everything else) as heterosexuals.

	CarolR, on 08/14/2008 @ 10:20 AM PST wrote:
		ALL citizens should have the same rights. If a gay couple gets married, it doesn't affect a heterosexual couple. So, who cares!

	KnightGG, on 08/21/2008 @ 11:08 PM PST wrote:
		Same sex marriage is difficult to define because the word marriage is tossed around carelessly. I may not agree with all your views but you should have the right to live your life as you choose.

	gershwin2003, on 08/24/2008 @ 12:24 PM PST wrote:
		Who cares if you are in a relationship with a male or female. Your decisions and right of your partner should be upheld!

	gurugirl, on 08/29/2008 @ 05:04 PM PST wrote:
		It seems lame and naive to think that people should even be stuck on such an issue. Hasn't consciousness come far enough that we can see people for what they are and have the same rights for everyone. For some people it may not be an important issue like the economy, but for thousands it is an injustice they live with everyday. We need to see that what we keep from one person or one section of society and horde for ourselves will one day be looked at as a huge mistake. Human first, not male or female, everyone with the same rights.

	PCWaitress, on 09/02/2008 @ 06:46 PM PST wrote:
		For all those who say "what's the big deal, it's just two people who are getting married" are ignorant to what this marriage now legally includes. The right to have kids, adoption, accepted lifestyle taught in schools, etc. are just a few examples. What if a church doesn't agree and refuses to preform the marriage? Do they have that right? The old addage: If you give a mouse a cookie....so spare me all the "no big deal" verbage and that "it doesn't affect you lies." I prefer to have a debate on the issue itself, rather than be belittled because I think it is a big deal and because I know it will affect me.

	christine1229, on 09/06/2008 @ 12:12 PM PST wrote:
		I am a little confused by whether the writer is supporting or not supporting same sex marriages. My views: everyone is created equal and are entitled to same rights as everyone else whether they are brown, yellow, green, straight, homosexual, gay .. I am absolutely 100% for same sex marriages and rights !

	modelthroughit, on 09/12/2008 @ 11:04 AM PST wrote:
		As a Gay American, I can only hope that the next President of the United States will help to end the inequality that has been pressed upon the LGBT community. We are denied the more than 1,138 federal rights, protections and responsibilities automatically granted to married heterosexual couples. That's all we're asking for - equal federal rights, protections and responsibilities. Gay marriage hurts no one. It's divorce that hurts.

	grinny, on 09/13/2008 @ 10:00 PM PST wrote:
		I personally know at least a dozen families where the parents are a homosexual couple. All of these folks are loving parents that are raising their kids to be good people.

	jessforturk, on 09/15/2008 @ 01:20 AM PST wrote:
		I am completely in agreement with this letter. I feel it is a shame that this is even an issue. Love knows no boundaries within race, sex, religion, etc. How ridiculous that our society is still oppressing a group of people who would just like to be given the same societal right as the majority?

	elusivemind, on 09/20/2008 @ 06:54 PM PST wrote:
		Passing a law to allow gays to marry does not make it right. Sure, let them do what they want in private; sin is sin regardless of where you are. But whether you've forgotten this or not, our country was founded on religion. Where are we going to draw the line? Are we going to allow monogamy as well, then?

	nicf03, on 09/22/2008 @ 01:12 PM PST wrote:
		Why can the government choose who you love and want to marry? I am Christian, don't think same sex partnership is right, but I don't judge and no one should be able to stop who they want to marry.

	Moose_1, on 09/30/2008 @ 08:48 PM PST wrote:
		People get so worked up on either side of this argument. Laws and morals are simply prescripts of how much we are allowed to interfere(sp) with others' lives with respects to the rights of all. The difference being that laws have a much smaller sphere of influence that morals, but only laws can be enforced. Following these laws and moral prescripts with respects to individuals' rights lead to a more stable society. Morals only limit the harm you can do to others, not yourself--thats why its not immoral to be a drug addict or to commit suicide. Gay marrige harms no one, therefore it should not be immoral nor illegal. The argument over the word 'marriage' is a waste of energy. If it appeases the religious, then rename all government marriages as 'civil unions' and let marriages be a religious institution with no leagl binding.

	Reaganomics101, on 10/01/2008 @ 11:53 AM PST wrote:
		By your rationale, farmer dan should be able to marry his cow. A legal union whereas a binding agreement can be made between two people (could be an aunt and cousin, or two friends) Should entirely be allowed. Marriage is a sectional issue meaning it has absolutely no place in a political debate.

	rubypie, on 10/04/2008 @ 06:12 PM PST wrote:
		Rights of homosexuals should be persued to include hospital visitation, first of kin estate issues and so on. Marriage is over rated anyway especially w/ over 50% divorce rate these days...

	Niko_B, on 10/10/2008 @ 09:33 PM PST wrote:
		I agree! All Americans should be treated with the same level of dignity and respect, especially by the government that they pay to keep in power.

	coffeecup2008, on 10/12/2008 @ 07:20 PM PST wrote:
		Our country was founded on Christian values. The bible defines marriage as a union between "man" and "woman". However, I support civil unions and adoption rights between homosexuals.

	carolinarocks, on 10/15/2008 @ 06:43 AM PST wrote:
		Marriage is a religious institution; civil unions are not. Perhaps taking the religion out of government and giving equal protection to all citizens would work? Maybe we could pass some sort of Equal Protection Clause or something?

	MMWine2008, on 10/17/2008 @ 08:34 AM PST wrote:
		It is not ruining anyone else's life when people of the same sex get married! I see no problem with it, it makes no sense to deny them of it!!! It's a different world now, people need to advance a little in their beliefs!!

	juicestain, on 10/22/2008 @ 10:50 PM PST wrote:
		I think anyone should be able to marry, same sex or not. it doesnt seem like marriage means anything anymore unless its in your checkbook

	Vwong, on 10/25/2008 @ 02:54 PM PST wrote:
		Gay people are people too, and getting married by law doesn't really affect society at large in my opinion. I agree with "Junctamox". If gays wish to be married and be joined by God, that's something they'd have to take up with the church.

	mistahnice, on 10/27/2008 @ 03:27 AM PST wrote:
		It is outrageous that anyone could disagree with you, the rights of an entire subtype of sexuality cannot be decided by closed-minded "traditionalists".

	benijanaben, on 10/27/2008 @ 11:26 AM PST wrote:
		It really is nobody's decision but the church's to decide who should be allowed to use the term marriage. Homosexuals should be happy and content with "legal union" or should make up their own non-religous term.

	SykoNinja, on 10/28/2008 @ 10:56 PM PST wrote:
		I must disagree. If we keep allowing things in this nature, we will lose ourselves, and what/who we are. I don't think homosexuals should be allowed to marry.

	aj2100, on 10/30/2008 @ 08:18 PM PST wrote:
		I absolutely agree. Same sex couples have just as much of an equal right to marriage.

	bella, on 11/04/2008 @ 11:42 AM PST wrote:
		I agree that many strides have been made in support of gay marriage. I think it is being treated in a "seperate but equal" way right now. By granting certain rights and civil unions is the governments way of trying to make things equal for gay couples. But in reality things are not equal in terms of legal benefits and such. I think we need to make gay marriage legal already!

	lrmoore2, on 11/06/2008 @ 04:57 PM PST wrote:
		I am not sure which side Obama stands on the issue of same sex marriage?

	thegrey, on 11/11/2008 @ 07:57 PM PST wrote:
		Homosexuals have the same rights as any other citizen! What they do not have, nor do they deserve, are SPECIAL privileges. We cannot continue to allow special-interest minority groups to twist our laws and fundamental principles.

	TomTheBomb, on 11/17/2008 @ 08:29 PM PST wrote:
		Gays have all the rights they need. Ever watch Will and Grace. Listen to Clay Aiken? Be subjected to Rosie O? They are celebrated.

	jessicamfry, on 11/21/2008 @ 08:57 AM PST wrote:
		You wouldn't accept it if I married my brother. Why should the government accept and even condone the equally immoral same sex marriage? I don't have any hate in my heart for those who are gay. We are all sinners. This just opens the door to all other types of immorality in the name of trying to please everyone. United States, stick by the principles of our forefathers!

	pattisw, on 11/22/2008 @ 08:17 AM PST wrote:
		Denying anyone a basic right that everyone else has is plain old discrimination regardless of race,sex,religion or anything else.

	Kristen, on 11/22/2008 @ 07:09 PM PST wrote:
		Love is the answer. The government should not restrict love. If people want to commit to each other, good. Government should get out of their way.

	jbrew2007, on 11/24/2008 @ 08:53 AM PST wrote:
		I do not agree with this assessment of Homosexual rights, homosexuals do not deserve the same rights as heterosexual couples. They are not equal and should not be given the same rights.

	gasdertum, on 11/29/2008 @ 10:10 AM PST wrote:
		I strongly disagree.It shouldn't be allowed gay couples to marry.If you want to marry go to Holland.

	limegreenstars27, on 12/01/2008 @ 09:19 PM PST wrote:
		Noone has a right to tell me who I can or cannot marry. Man or Women, or even the inbetween. This country was built for me by me, so how about the government start acting like it.

	peytoncd, on 12/05/2008 @ 01:46 PM PST wrote:
		Eloquently written. I read somewhere that gay is the new black. This just may be the case. I hope I see equality in my lifetime.

	RayaPlaya, on 12/06/2008 @ 07:02 PM PST wrote:
		Getting rid of same-sex marriages will not get rid of homosexuals. Being a heterosexual, I don't think it's really a big deal if they choose to get married or not. It's not going to bother us with extra taxes or anything so have at it.

	monogloop, on 12/09/2008 @ 03:24 PM PST wrote:
		Unless gay couples are sitting on your front lawn fornicating in front of your kids, people should mind their own business and focus on things that actually affect their lives. Let people live their lives - you don't have to agree with it, but don't thrust your opinions on others.

	fyrikaos, on 12/11/2008 @ 12:28 PM PST wrote:
		Hey folks, this is 2008 not 1908 - you cannot catch homophobia, gays aren't miscreants that are going to ruin our communities and families - get over it. They are human beings with desires, feelings, hopes and aspirations just like the rest of us. Playing the semantics game between the terms 'marriage' and 'legal union' - please... stop the non-sense. It is sad that in this day and age there is even a question of this being legal. Why shouldn't 2 men or 2 women be allowed to marry? they are allowed to pay taxes, they are allowed to donate blood, they are allowed to vote, they aren't some lower life form and treating them as such is just wrong and disgusting. Leave religion OUT OF POLITICS!!!

	dmurph462, on 12/16/2008 @ 10:30 AM PST wrote:
		By not allowing samesex couples right we will take a step back in want some many people fought for in early campaigns and give an undeserved W to the relgious right wing

	Marie07, on 12/20/2008 @ 11:04 AM PST wrote:
		I disagree with this letter because homosexuals are not on the same level as heterosexuals. Marriage is between a man and a women only. Not a man and another man or a women and another women. Homosexuals are an abomination.

	bittervictory, on 12/24/2008 @ 05:08 AM PST wrote:
		All American citizens should equal rights under the law. This should include marriage rights for homosexual couples so they can enjoy the same rights and benefits of marriage at heterosexual couples.

	Jlkhollins, on 12/24/2008 @ 07:55 AM PST wrote:
		The right to marry should not be decided within the walls of congress on rest in the presidents hand. The choice of who to marry lies within each person and should be decided by that person, not by government.

	StefE84, on 12/29/2008 @ 01:13 PM PST wrote:
		It's insane to me that anyone feels it's there place to deny somone of being married to another they love. Honestly why do we even care? Is it going to affect your life any way b/c Sally and Susie are married? No, So what the point in us denying them that right?

	d2william, on 12/29/2008 @ 08:32 PM PST wrote:
		It's definitely time that we protected the civil rights of all individuals. As a happily married strait man, I would very much like to see same sex marriage allowed, protected, and respected here in the US.

	yashadk, on 01/01/2009 @ 01:02 AM PST wrote:
		The battle over same sex marriage and the religious argument against it seems to me very invalid because in the United States of America, where we make it a point to distinguish the separation of Church and State, marriage should be a civil right now a religious one and there should be no debate on whether what the bible says affects what goes into law in the Constitution!

	jrj102, on 01/03/2009 @ 10:29 PM PST wrote:
		Civil unions are a good first step, but don't go far enough to provide equality to a significant portion of our country's population. A marriage has two components-- the legal, and religious. Many choose to get married in a church. This allows them to be pronounced married in a religious context, and with God as they understand him. The other component is a contractual agreement-- and the latter is the ONLY part that the government has any role in. The government has no place in religion, and no place in the bedroom. They have no role in a marriage, except to enforce a contractual agreement. If "gay marriage" meant I had to marry a man, I'd be against it. However, I'm free to stay married to my wife, so I don't see what the big deal is. Your church doesn't have to recognize someone's marriage if it conflicts with your views. You don't have to recognize it either... however, the government is only involved in the contractual aspect.

	lessworkmoreart, on 01/04/2009 @ 02:29 AM PST wrote:
		I wouldn't worry about this one for too long, there was a time when women were worried we wouldn't have the right to vote, eventually common sense gets the best of everyone. These people who are out marching on the streets filled with hate and inaccuracy will watch as their kids vote for Gay Rights, it's just the way life goes. Keep your head up;) I'll see you when that day comes for sure...

	flightlessplague, on 01/04/2009 @ 04:15 AM PST wrote:
		Marriage is a man made thing as it is. There's nothing sacred or religious about it. The sacredness of marriage comes between the two people who are in love. For the government to interfere with that is just ridiculous

	kfleming78, on 01/04/2009 @ 07:34 AM PST wrote:
		Marriage is a concept from the Bible, that's where the entire concept was born. I am not a bible beater, I don't even believe in the bible. There are only 2 reasons that I can see gay people wanting to be married. First is for tax reasons, Second is just to try to piss people off. I think there should be a law for marriage and a seperate entity for homosexual unions.

	plotbunnytiff, on 01/05/2009 @ 12:35 PM PST wrote:
		"What's wrong with a "legal union" with all the legal rights and responsibilities of marriage?" What's wrong is that coaching it in those terms makes it all too easy to manipulate the legal ramifications around it. You also force a Christian view on the word "marriage", giving it the additional baggage of that religion's view of homosexuality. There are other religions that have marrage ceremonies that are supportive of gays.

	otoniok, on 01/06/2009 @ 12:42 PM PST wrote:
		I don't think the government should interfere in marriage -- whether it be straight or homosexual. I understand the benefits of being married through the state and that is a whole other issue that I don't want to get into. The government makes things frustrating by taxing EVERYTHING.

	PayinDownDebt, on 01/06/2009 @ 05:06 PM PST wrote:
		I think we are not God, we can not judge, what does letting two people who love each other marry really have to do with your soul? It doesn't, if God has a problem with Gays he'll take care of it, it's your job as a christian to treat others as you wish to be treat. Limiting rights is not something that Jesus would want, he's after all the biggest liberal of all. To which I say if it's against God's wish, he'll take care of it you don't need to. Let them marry it's not going to damn you to hell, but the hatred you hold for them just might.

	beristraw, on 01/10/2009 @ 12:41 PM PST wrote:
		Marriage should be between two people who love each other, regardless of sex. Is it truly effecting anyone else? No. For all of those who argue that it should be banned because it is a "sin" and it was "invented (Really? Where is the patent...) for a man and a woman- you are making choices based on religion. This is supposed to be a country where church and government are seperate. Lets not let religion interfere anymore than it already has and give these people the equality they deserve. And for everyone who says it will confused children, their peers will make fun of them, etc. That is foolish. One day, people are going to look back at this time period and think that we were silly for even considering gay marriage as something that is "illegal."

	eviesmama, on 01/10/2009 @ 01:49 PM PST wrote:
		It honestly makes me sick to my stomach that discrimination laws are not EXACTLY the same for homosexuals as for any other minority group. Can you imagine what would happen if the nation went back to banning interracial marriages? Or saying that African Americans (or any other group) should be allowed to live together, but not marry or adopt or make medical decisions for each other? People are so ignorant.

	gnarlymun, on 01/10/2009 @ 01:56 PM PST wrote:
		I'm all for gay rights but what does kennedy and civil rights with blacks have to do with this? Im biracial, italian and black, can people stop using freeing slaves and giving them equal rights a cross-reference to allowing some one legally bind a sexual preference?

	chrive7, on 01/11/2009 @ 03:25 PM PST wrote:
		If same-sex marriage is a question of religious preferences (which, I firmly believe it is when people are against it), why should people not do what they want outside the realm of the church/temple/mosque etc...? Didn't people come to this country seeking religious refuge anyway? Same-sex marriage should be allowed, simply for the fact that people shouldn't be bothered by something in the privacy in another person's home.

	politico88, on 01/12/2009 @ 02:19 AM PST wrote:
		I think it is time for homosexual couples to have the legal benefits of marriage. It is also time for people to grow up and realize that homosexuals exist and that they are people too. They deserve all the rights that straight people have.

	Rachieroo, on 01/12/2009 @ 12:27 PM PST wrote:
		Why do people get so upset over a piece of paper that means absolutely nothing to 50% of Americans? Maybe if all of these divorcing heterosexual couples had been made to jump through as many damn hoops straight into brick walls as homosexual couples have had to they'd value their piece of paper a little more. Gays are ruining American values, huh? What values? We live in a country were it's still cool to hate people based on religion, race, gender, and sexual orientation. We live in a country were the majority is allowed to decide just who deserves basic human rights. We live in a country where marriage is so meaningless that some of us choose to do it over and over again. We live in a country where most of us have forgotten what it is to love and be loved. Those are some values we're upholding.

	rsteele, on 01/12/2009 @ 01:51 PM PST wrote:
		I agree as a homosexual myself, that the rights of our kind should not be walked on. We are humans too and have feelings and rights. For all you gay haters, think of it like this: what if somebody hated you for a certain food you liked? If I hated everybody who liked french fries just because I didn't like them, that is the same thing as you hating gays for their preference. Because that is all it is...a preference. Nobody should be hated for that.

	sillyrabbit82, on 01/12/2009 @ 04:56 PM PST wrote:
		Please act boldy on this issue, President Elect Obama. Your positions on other issues are ones of inclusion, not devisiveness. Furthermore, it will be good for the economy to endorse loving, healthy relationships.

	brodyaga, on 01/12/2009 @ 08:31 PM PST wrote:
		It's my hope that future generations will look back at the oppression of LGBT citizens and see it as being as ludicrous and wrong as the efforts to limit the rights of racial minorities and women.

	xombicide, on 01/17/2009 @ 12:02 PM PST wrote:
		I really wish people would stop making such a huge deal about this issue. It is just love. Plain and simple.

	pinkglamgirlie, on 01/18/2009 @ 08:30 PM PST wrote:
		I agree! This is another civil rights movement and we all have to opportunity to part of history. Whether or not you're ok with the word marriage in these situations, something needs to be done. No one deserves to be treated like a second class citizen.

	BDavis, on 01/23/2009 @ 07:22 AM PST wrote:
		I'm a live and let live type of person. If homosexuals get married, that doesn't mean that a heterosexual couple somewhere can't get married - there aren't a fixed amount of marriages to go around.

	hendo1843, on 01/26/2009 @ 07:34 PM PST wrote:
		It is hard to believe that in 2009 we still have to discuss equal rights issues. I heard that the main argument by religious folks as to why same sex marriage should be banned is because they fear that the gays will sue priest that refuse to marry them. So Lame!!

	BigGeorge, on 01/26/2009 @ 10:08 PM PST wrote:
		Same sex marriages is based on a myth that two people of the same sex can and should have a blessing by society and God. I love my cat but would not argue for the opportunity to enter a legal and sacred arrangement with him

	akazoe, on 01/27/2009 @ 03:09 AM PST wrote:
		Love knows no boundaries. Whether it is between a man and a woman, a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, if the states are in the business of granting marriage contracts then they should do so without regard to a person's sexual orientation. If heterosexual couples enjoy the benefits of marriage, homosexual couples should be able to, also.

	ChicoryGrl, on 01/29/2009 @ 03:16 PM PST wrote:
		I have faith in this country to CHANGE its mind... that is be beauty of American -- its ok to think and its ok to change your mind! I know that America will one day give gays and lesbians the rights they deserve.

	rg7fn, on 01/30/2009 @ 07:34 AM PST wrote:
		This issue baffles me more than abortion. Why does anyone care who is in love with you? Why stop at sex? Let's ban blacks and whites from being married. Christians and non-Christians. Fat and skinny. Ugly and pretty. Let's just have arranged assigned marriages by the government. It's just as insane as banning gay marriages in my eyes. People need to mind their business! Great letter!!!!!!!

	sowtime444, on 01/30/2009 @ 04:54 PM PST wrote:
		Good letter. Unfortunately it doesn't appear that Obama supports gay marriage. He says that he is for affording gay couples all of the rights of marriage, but I wonder if there will be any legislation in this regard. Do we really have to fall back on the excuse of "it is up to the states to decide?"

	Biffster, on 01/31/2009 @ 07:05 PM PST wrote:
		In my opinion same sex marriage is not a hot button issue at all. It is an issue that the media uses to sell magazines and tv ad space. I've been circulating in gay and straight circles from coast to coast and this has not ever been a topic that has come up. I don't think government should be involved in any way in any marriage between legal aged adults.

	goodasyou, on 02/01/2009 @ 10:36 AM PST wrote:
		I am confident that Pres. Obama is with us even more than we know. I predict that this administration will help us change the conversation on this matter.

	klpatter, on 02/07/2009 @ 05:55 PM PST wrote:
		I think we should let Obama get a few other issues taken care before we ask him to reveal what he really values and risk not getting re-elected. Same sex marriage is an issue he will evade for some time.

	justaminute4, on 02/11/2009 @ 09:40 PM PST wrote:
		First, I should say that I'm gay and believe gay relationships should have all the government recognition that straight ones do. That said, I'd feel much more comfortable saying that the government should only recognize civil unions for straight people than saying it should also recognize marriage for gay people. In our secular state, the civil rights and privileges that come with an official union should be the extent of the government's interference. If the gov.t got out of "marriage" per se, then so would the courts and ballot Propositions. Whether one was "married," then, would be between one & one's partner--and maybe one's cleric of choice.

	cool, on 02/18/2009 @ 05:45 PM PST wrote:
		It is really very unhealthy to marry people of same sex.If people of same sex will get married, there is no progeny ultimately.

	gokendra, on 02/28/2009 @ 01:40 AM PST wrote:
		People are afraid of change. Even worse, people are afraid of changing sometimes ill-founded and spoon-fed opinions. I can not tell anyone else who to love. Neither can you. Marriage is for everyone, that is the beauty of America. Marriage is not just some term heterosexuals coined and copyrighted. It is a union between two consenting adults who love each other and agree to take care of each other. You can not deny two hard-working members of society the right to get married because of their genitals.

	Turk100, on 03/03/2009 @ 09:49 AM PST wrote:
		A little heavy on the hate to the religious right, as it is really an age barrier not a religious barrier. You will find more young people than old people who will support gay marriage regardless of their religion. Just changing times, just as the whole race issue was hot 40-50 years ago, this one is now.

	Teamboobear, on 03/07/2009 @ 02:39 PM PST wrote:
		hahaha leave marriage to the heteros?? i'd like to know what's so different about homosexual people. they eat, sleep, and breathe just like everyone else. some, are even BETTER than you straight people at the majority of jobs you work. this is completely ridiculous and will never stop. what a shame.

	hcalvert, on 03/08/2009 @ 02:52 PM PST wrote:
		Who am I to decide if someone should marry or not? I think that some homosexuals are more in love and have a more lasting relationship than some heterosexual relationships. Big Brother is at it again when they banned it. What happened to separation of church and state?

	mich1073, on 03/12/2009 @ 07:03 AM PST wrote:
		If someone wants to get married let them.. I know there is a huge following thinking that gay people have no right to be gay. But I highly doubt Obama will ever allow gay marriage. He personally does not agree with them. So should they be allowed to yes, will it ever happen no likely!

	xprins, on 03/12/2009 @ 08:23 AM PST wrote:
		I agree, homosexuals should indeed have every right as anyone else. I believe it is as much a choice as being born with six fingers on your left hand.

	tomcheezy, on 03/12/2009 @ 03:35 PM PST wrote:
		4 years ago I would have disagreed, but I think it has been proven that Homosexuality is genetic. Since it is genetic, I do not believe it is fair for homosexuals to not be allowed to marry each other. It is not in their control. However is homosexuality is just a lifestyle choice, then it should not be allowed.

	Cidra, on 03/17/2009 @ 12:15 AM PST wrote:
		I cannot see this issue as being equal to that of the Civil rights movements of the 60's.

	kaymkay713, on 03/17/2009 @ 12:30 PM PST wrote:
		Do what you want, but in the privacy of your own home. Marriage=the union of one man and one woman. Everytime someone brings up same-sex marriage, all I can think about is "I now pronounce you Chuck and Larry" and how they cheated the system by pretending to be gay.

	greenestdave, on 04/01/2009 @ 03:45 AM PST wrote:
		I absolutely agree. Marriage is a right everyone has. If it would placate some opposition, however, why not call it 'civil union' or something instead? It works fine in other countries.

	kristijdaniels, on 04/01/2009 @ 01:51 PM PST wrote:
		Marriage is about love. Period. End of story. There is no one on this earth that is put in the position to judge anyone else, so who is to say it is right or wrong.

	charlesjaymeyer, on 04/02/2009 @ 09:38 PM PST wrote:
		I don't think an issue like this should be voted on by only a select few. I think as Americans we should vote on this issue. Just like they did in California. But either way it goes, there will be people that will try to overturn it

	nomimalone1978, on 04/05/2009 @ 10:27 AM PST wrote:
		It's odd that so many people have issues with the word 'marriage'. Look into how the definition of marriage HAS changed. Pick up a dictionary. Seriously.

	fanatic6, on 04/06/2009 @ 04:32 PM PST wrote:
		I am hoping so much that Obama is able to instill some real change and make marriage available to everyone in the eyes of the law.

	johnrapp, on 04/10/2009 @ 05:53 PM PST wrote:
		This issue will only become more and more important, but right now I don't think it's important enough to really get the attention it deserves.

	dezinewiz, on 04/13/2009 @ 07:16 PM PST wrote:
		Being a gay man who is married, I do agree with this letter. I am not going to pinpoint as to the specifics of what is "right", and what is "wrong" in this letter. What I will point out is that LGBT folks have been around long before, and will be around long after Christianity, and anyone else who opposes such notions. As a world culture, we need to think about what is best for everyone, and be tolerable all the way around. I did not choose my sexuality. I was born with it. In speaking about the "popular vote", I can, as well, be just as mad about straight people marrying. But, I do not waste time spreading negative energy. In this country, we have a right to choose our religion. Wonderful. Don't force it on others, because I do not "force" my sexuality onto you.

	oh2ohz, on 05/12/2009 @ 05:12 PM PST wrote:
		"I think it does confuse kids... not to mention dealing with the ridicule from their peers." Perhaps we are focusing on the wrong thing.. should we infringe on people that can provide a good home for a child that needs a way out of foster systems in order to appease the child bullies? Who deserves the protection?

	windingwheel7, on 05/13/2009 @ 01:18 PM PST wrote:
		I agree; marriage should be something for every human to enjoy (or suffer through) if they wish.

	lhopew, on 05/15/2009 @ 06:05 PM PST wrote:
		What is wrong with allowing homosexual couples to get married?!?!?! They are still people, they should not be denied these rights simply because of their sexual orientation. What bothers me the most is when people pull their opinions based on religious beliefs. The issue should not be determined on the basis of religion...that's why we have the First Amendment! Yeesh.

	fegary, on 05/17/2009 @ 04:24 PM PST wrote:
		Families make up society. Society developed the institution of marriage to formally handle many things related to children (heirdom, etc) since most marriages are expected to produce children and help society to continue on. Same-sex couples are not capable of producing offspring (individually they may be - but not with their same-sex partner) and thus don't meet one of the primary reasons that marriage evolved. They can still have loving and lasting relationships with each other, but such a relationship should NOT be recognized as a marriage.

	marla66, on 05/27/2009 @ 08:48 PM PST wrote:
		Marriage should be for any two people of legal age who want to spend their lives together. Hetrosexuals have made a mess and proved time after time their inability to maintain a marriage- just look at the rate of divorce! Intolerance is not kind or right. People of all sexual orientations should be allow to legally and morally be together!

	ashtinafayelou, on 06/01/2009 @ 10:20 PM PST wrote:
		President Obama is not for same sex marriage, but rather civil unions. I think that if civil unions protect the rights of homosexual couples then that is what should be legal. I don't think that the definition of marriage should be changed though.

	xbll, on 06/12/2009 @ 09:10 AM PST wrote:
		it's time for equality. although I don't really care what they call it, gay marriage or civil unions. would a rose by any other name still smell as sweet? it's about the rights, the equality, it's about the taxes, it's about the visiting rights, it's about the bi-national immigration equality.

	internet855, on 06/13/2009 @ 11:01 AM PST wrote:
		Who is to deny the right of two individuals to a lawful marriage? Perhaps in the religious world, opposition may be understandable, but isn't this government based on the seperation of church and state?

	bertrand, on 06/19/2009 @ 01:46 PM PST wrote:
		Well said, especially regarding the judgment of history. I fail to understand how the bigots and homophobes opposing equal rights do not see themselves in the history books of our future alongside segregationists and racists.

	dkcreatto, on 06/20/2009 @ 08:47 PM PST wrote:
		Wow! Nice words out there AJChambers, . I agree that bisexual and homosexuals should be given liberty to have the same right as some straight have. Its in our own constitution that all are equal and should be give equal rights, each person has right to choose who he/she is and where s/he belongs to. I am a bisexual and I back you hard. ;-) ;-) ;-);-) ;-) ;-);-) ;-) ;-);-) ;-) ;-);-) ;-) ;-);-) ;-) ;-)

	Shawn_timothy, on 06/24/2009 @ 04:03 PM PST wrote:
		marriage is a sacred thing and personally i'm disgusted with today's worlds views.

	sfbaygirl, on 07/02/2009 @ 10:59 AM PST wrote:
		Thank you for putting a well-spoken and positive voice on this issue. I hope that Obama is indeed the man for this job.

	deadponies, on 07/02/2009 @ 12:24 PM PST wrote:
		This issue is about civil rights for a group of people who want equality. Why don't people recognize that in our country, groups seeking equal rights, eventually get it. Why prolong this process?

	j_murray, on 07/02/2009 @ 03:28 PM PST wrote:
		I am so, so TIRED of all those who think that a civil/legal union is the same as getting married! IT'S NOT! A civil union is only valid in the state it was issued in, and the Defense of Marriage Act (1996) prevents same-sex couples from receiving federal benefits that married couples get. If they're bound by a civil union, they only get state marriage rights. Read more here: http://www.factcheck.org/what_is_a_civil_union.html

	nmcocco, on 07/02/2009 @ 03:46 PM PST wrote:
		If I hear someone say that marriage is a religious institution again I will scream. Marriage was created as a legal business venture. God was nowhere in the picture. A man would marry off his daughter for land, which would then be LEGALLY owned by him. Oh then why did the church get involved you say? Because the church WAS the law when marriage was created. And gay marriage is not an EXTRA right. We should have to make concessions for anyone, thats the point of freedom.

	triangular, on 07/03/2009 @ 10:44 AM PST wrote:
		I'd maybe use "same-sex couples" throughout rather than "homosexuals," just because "homosexual" is clinical and often used by people wanting to deny rights, while the gay and lesbian communities don't tend to use the word. Also, the issue is rights for same-sex couples, regardless of how the parties identify in terms of gay, straight, bi, choose not to identify, whatever. Oh, and to the people who are saying that marriage has always been between a man and woman and whatnot; you might want to do some more research. The bible doesn't say anything about modern same-sex relationships. The Hebrew word for modern same-sex relationships does not appear anywhere in the bible. Try rereading it after you learn Hebrew; you can't base your information on a poor translation of the bible, and even so, not everyone believes in your bible.

	staceyg1976, on 07/03/2009 @ 09:13 PM PST wrote:
		I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but that is my religious belief. When it comes to politics and supporting our citizens reguardless of their moral or religous beliefs, we must honor the same rights and priviliges to everyone reguardless if they believe in abortion, same sex marriage etc. The fact that civil union is a product of the governmental system gives those who have a civil union marriage the rights to claim benefits through the government so if people of the same sex have a civil union marrige they should have the same priviliges as well.

	Jargon Micro Solutions Pvt. Ltd., on 07/15/2009 @ 11:53 PM PST wrote:
		As a straight male i must say that one should marry only the opposite sex. you can love anyone but marry only an opposite sex.

	mommy1255, on 07/16/2009 @ 02:20 PM PST wrote:
		Same sex marriage only has people's fears and religious reasons to give to say no, but I think more consideration is needed than just that in order to make a decision of whether or not it should be accepted.

	Dugankurz, on 07/30/2009 @ 11:21 PM PST wrote:
		Unfortunately those who support gay marriage simply do not know what marriage is. Marriage is the cornerstone institution where a man and a woman come together to do the hard work of creating and raising the next generation of good citizens. It does not require romantic love, and before 70 years ago, never heard of that requirement. It only requires commitment and a knowledge of the roles necessary to carry out the duty to create and protect the gift of life and good acculturation. Society has a compelling interest in a marriage between a man and a woman because it is the source of the future, and the best source of the next generation of good citizens.