Dammit, I can’t find the study now…

Anyway, argument attacked. Go take your intolerance somewhere else. That’s definitely a choice.

Did you hear that? NOOOOTHIIING!

Because the United States is a secular nation, that means that religion is SEPARATE from government laws. It doesn’t matter one whit what God or Jesus or Allah or other chosen diety says. And since that’s about the only argument against gay marraige, I can’t understand why it wouldn’t be legal.

The internet is not a place that you can do whatever you want.

I think I just vomited a little in my mouth.

Yeah. That sounds really likely.

What is immoral about homosexual marriage? Besides you religious belief system? Marriage is not a belief of any sort. It’s an institution. It has NOT always been religious. Atheists get married. **gasp!** Let’s go back to the way it used to be. Let’s reinstate dowries and let the local ruler get the customary first lay. I’ll need a handmaiden to kill a chicken and put some blood on the sheets so it looks like my hymen was ruptured and I won’t get stoned to death for not being a virgin (oops).

I’m not going to claim that Wikipedia is the most accurate thing in the entire world, but it’s pretty damn close, so here’s a clip from the “History” section of “Marriage”:
The way in which a marriage is conducted has changed over time, as has the institution itself. Although the institution of marriage pre-dates reliable recorded history, many cultures have legends or religious beliefs concerning the origins of marriage.[14]

One of the oldest known and recorded marriage laws is discerned from Hammurabi’s Code, enacted during the Mesopotamian world (widely considered as the cradle of civilization). The legal institution of marriage and its rules and ramifications have changed over time depending on the culture or demographic of the time.[15]

Various cultures have had their own theories on the origin of marriage. One example may lie in a man’s need for assurance as to paternity of his children. He might therefore be willing to pay a bride price or provide for a woman in exchange for exclusive sexual access.[16] Legitimacy is the consequence of this transaction rather than its motivation. In Comanche society, married women work harder, lose sexual freedom, and do not seem to obtain any benefit from marriage.[17] But nubile women are a source of jealousy and strife in the tribe, so they are given little choice other than to get married. “In almost all societies, access to women is institutionalized in some way so as to moderate the intensity of this competition.”

So basically marriage is goverment sanctioned prostitution. (Duh. I mean seriously.) The man provides for the woman and the woman puts out. That sure is romantic. And it sounds super sacred.

*I use this word sarcastically.

I’m ecstatically happy being straight, too!!! Because I like men!!! But if were sexually attracted to females, I would be completely depressed trying to live as a straight woman. For the record: I have TRIED to perform some…less than heterosexual…acts…to make the boyfriend happy, you know. TMI? The point is, that’s just not the way my brain is wired, and it was not an enjoyable experience for me.

Also…I’m straight. If I choose NOT to reproduce, should I be disallowed from getting married? Since I’m not fulfilling my essential function?

If we’re going to strip rights from people because they’re not fulfulling your idea of what their essential function on this planet are, then we should start trimming down the population to make more room for breeders. You could call it your final solution.

BTW-I have every intention of reproducing someday, but I fail to see how a gay couple getting married will interfere with that.

I’LL BRING THE POT AND SODA

YOU HEAR THAT GUYS?

and theres a lot more stuff the Church did worse than atheists.

i rest my case.

Consequences aren’t always bad, it’s like a synonym to result.
It’s just the effect of something.

That means IVF is unnecessary. Nobody forced anybody into anything. It was a party and a great time was had by all. The baby had the biggest group of godfathers in history and every birthday, Christmas, Easter, and July 4th have been jam packed with love and familial sharing. Think of all the presents!

My sister and her wife have finalized adoption of my sister-in-law’s nephew whose unmarried mother was unable to care for the child due to medical issues. Two working, responsible, loving mommies are better than one unstable, medically challenged one, don’t you think?

It’s that kind of stuff that proves anti-gay marriage sentiment and claims at its destructive propensity toward the common good to be alarmist tripe. These families deserve all the protections and advantages recognized heterosexual unions enjoy. The equal protection clause of the US Constitution will someday soon assure that they shall.

Adding gay marriage to governmentally recognized family structues merely increases the options among the population. Any claims that marriage equality threatens heterosexual unions is disingenuous, magical thinking, fear mongering nonsense.

It’s only a matter of time. You see, religious prohibition to marriage equality are not enough reason to bar civil marriage equality according to the US Constitution. Mere public opinion has been proven time and again to fall short as reason enough to deny any group of people living in the US of rights enjoyed by any others without a compelling reason to do so. The separation of church and state essentially means that religion does not exist as a reason to deny anybody any manner of rights whatsoever.

and btw… you can marry anyone you want in church at elvis, at city hall. love is great no matter who you are or who you love…let’s celebrate it. and the ignorant fool who said that marriage is responsible for babies..what are you smoking!! I agree that you prolly got married after you were pregnant!!!

“no state shall … deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”.

Hegemeny-bites-you-on-the-ass. Win.