Still stand with this opinion..

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 

To me.. the concept of not allowing them to join in the legal definition of marriage is absurd.

The church and afterlife can have there say independently from the legalities of this country..

The hypocrisy of any government that will label "Under God" from the pledge of Allegiance as nothing more than "ceremonial and patriotic nature", cannot justifiably cite any religious connotations to gay marriage. You can't have it both ways.

We have wasted probably billions of dollars in this country on this topic, that has really no reason to be an issue for the government to rule upon.

It is not our fight as a union to decide.. two adults should be able to form a marriage freely if both consent.. regardless of sex, race or religion.

But pressure from religious voters sways the self serving politician in seeking re-election.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 

OK, point taken, but ......... as I'm sure you know, if you think about it, there is a LOT more to marriage in terms of government than mere approval - affirmative aspects: tax law, community property and inheritance, just to name a few. You want to apply all of that to homosexuals the same as to normal married people? OK, then how about polygamy? A much stronger case can be made for THAT in terms of normalcy, morality, and religion than for homosexuality. And if abnormal and religiously abominable is deemed to be acceptable, then how about the guy who wants to marry his favorite sheep - or maybe the whole flock? Where do you draw the line?

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

You draw the line with two human beings. This really isn't that difficult. It's just one more thing for all the Leviticus Christians out there to stomach. Poor bastards! The bigots have beaten up gay people long enough, let them have their rights.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

I say "let the poor bastards have their rights".


I'm not here to judge anyone else's sexual activities.

Originally Posted by: dfosterf 

OK, then how about polygamy? A much stronger case can be made for THAT in terms of normalcy, morality, and religion cherry picking beliefs from bronze age fables than for homosexuality.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

Fixed.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 

It scares me that there are still people who use terms like "perversion" when it comes down to homosexuality.

Originally Posted by: GermanGilbert