Do you agree with the gay-marriage bans?

The Constitutional ammendment of Prop. 8 only establishes the definition of marriage that can be found in any English dictionary, "the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. " For a panel of judges to overturn the will of the people is outrageous. For the minority of a populance to impose their "beliefs" as civil rights is also outrageous. Let the definition of marriage stand as a testament to the sanctity of what only a man and a woman can create together. I am not for denying the rights of others, just preserving a definition. 

While I said I do not SUPPORT it, I would not vote for a law to BAN it. These people are not doing ANYTHING to hurt me or my family personally so let them be. Where I get concerned is CHILDREN of gays may find persecution among their peers if they found out they're parents are gay. It is a harsh discriminatory world we live in and old ideas die hard. It will take a long time for people to change but I have faith. The election of Barack Obama has changed the face of history and I am so happy for him!!!!

When will people stop confusing "gay rights" with civil rights, such as a person of color or a woman being allowed to vote?  There is absolutely no comparison.  Why does perversion need to legally express itself?  If you must legally sin, keep it to yourself!  Meanwhile, you well meaning straight folk who think gay marriage is okay are actually doing these persons a great disservice.  Ask any reformed gay (someone who has renounced the gay lifestyle) and you shall find a person who has come to know true joy and freedom that no civil law could ever provide.  Further, it's a joke that young boys and girls can declare themselves gay.  How could they know?  Stop ruining our precious children!

The whole nature v. nurture thing is a lot more complicated than it's often presented as.  Studies have shown that sometimes behavior persisted in can CHANGE brain chemistry.  There are times when a homosexual lifestyle is a choice.  Are there other cases where the tendency is definitely biologically based, and very evident from an early age? I don't think anyone would dispute that.  But ultimately, even if it was shown that ALL homosexuality was the result of "being born that way," I don't see how that matters.  Human beings are born with all kinds of tendencies, not all of which are good or profitable to society. Nature doesn't automatically equal "right."

For instance, many pedophiles will tell you that they were "born that way."  It is an attraction they find hard to fight.  To them, it seems 'natural' because they were born that way.  Would anyone supportive of gay marriage like to extend the 'nature = right' to pedophiles?  If not, why not?  What about two men and a woman, or two women and one man?  If they like it that way, and want it to be a marriage, why shouldn't this 'menage a trois' be legally recognized?  What about some guy who wants to be married to a goat?  You may think I am getting ridiculous here, but I'm exploring where and when a line should be drawn if the two main aguments in favor of gay marriage are:  1. it's based on whatever someone feels to be natural for them and 2.  it's an inalienable right to have whatever relationship someone wants to have be legally recognized.

This is a pretty 'liberal' society, really, when it comes to love and relationships. It's not like living under the Taliban where you can be stoned to death if you don't follow the religious rules.  You can love and live with someone of the same sex, live unmarried with someone of the opposite sex, be a serial adulterer--no one is really going to care or regulate it.  In fact, live as openly as you want, collect inurance benefits, whatever.  But to take the HUGE step to calling any of these alternate arrangements a 'marriage'?--No.  This is irrespective of any 'religious' basis.  A society has a vested interest in maintaining marriage as between one man and one woman and should do everything possible to legally protect, support and improve traditional marriage (and there is plenty of work to do in that regard).

As a feminist I cannot support gay marriage.  Marriage is about a man and a woman coming together to bear and raise children, and to continue our society.  Not in a test tube, and not in a same-sex union.  Biologically, that isn't how it works.  Women in their childbearing years and children are damaged by the dilution of marriage to "anything goes."  In reality, on an island, only the same-sex unions that produce children are the unions that perpetuate society.  And island of gay men, separated from an island of gay women, guarantees that their "society" will die out.

I do think it is ok to legislate benefits for same-sex couples, but not marriage.  Marriage is a proven institution that works as the basis of society for recorded history.  There are things you just shouldn't mess with.  Biology is one, marriage is the other.  The majority has spoken!

The real problem is never discussed, the gay lifestyle is full of disease.  AIDS is basically preventable, just keep your pants on!  We provide all kinds of medications to keep people alive without changing their life style.  They live longer thus infecting many more people.  There is NO diseasae in a monogamous man-woman relationship, the same cannot be said with gays even excluding AIDS.  Then we are all ask to share the higher health costs, so we are all affected by their life style CHOICE!

With respect to the discussion about a significantly higher percentage of children raised in homosexual families "being" homosexual, I propose that it is not QUITE like that.  Rather, those children who are raised in a heterosexual family are more inclined to suppress their nature in order to fit in, while those in a homosexual family will not have the inhibition and will accept their nature, whatever it is.  As for marriage, any and all attempts to not allow regular marriage between two humans of the age of consent who happen to be the same gender will be found unconstitutional.  We have settled the argument of separate but equal with Brown v. The Board of Education.  Miscegenation laws were likewise found unconstitutional.  As for any argument that involves a religious component, our country was founded on the rule of law, not rule of religion - it was likewise founded on the freedom OF religion (not FROM!).

I bet it’s safe to say our days on earth are short.  I feel sure life is about to change.  It's too bad Christians are forced to endure this sorrow.  Everyone needs to read their Bible and practice its teachings.  "GOD FORGIVER US FOR WE NOT KNOW WHAT WE DO." 

marriage is suppose to be a union between 2 people who vow to love, honor til death. Love and honor knows no boundries of gender. Live and Let Live. Concentrate on your own life, and allow others to do the same.

Unless, of course, you believe God has given you his proxy to speak for him.

I am deeply disappointed that, on the occasion of this historice election, my state chose to add a fear-based amendment which restricts a person's civil liberties to the state constitution.  Shame on Florida!

It has nothing to do with civil rights, its about having children.  Same sex "marriage" is like a child getting a building permit so he can play fort with the box the washing machine came in.  The State and church don't care that two same sex people love each other because they can't insure that the state or church will be around in 100 years; only children can do that. 

As a Florida voter, I am horrified that amendment 2 passed. How in this day and age, as we elect our first African American president, can we pass an amendment that discriminates against so many people?? It comes down to basic civil rights. Our country should provide the same rights and benefits to gay couples as it does to heterosexual couples. I fully believe in separation of church and state, but sadly, too many in the state of Florida do not.

Additionally, many people do not realize that this amendment (which was so poorly worded, by the way) affects more than just the rights of gay couples. What about the elderly in the state of Florida, who when their spouses die, have been forced to live together and file as couple in order to receive benefits. What about heterosexual couples who are unmarried or engaged and are receiving partner benefits?? This amendment discriminates against the single and the elderly as well.

I am not for any amendment that strips away the humanitarian and basic civil rights of our citizens.

Marriage is suppose to be a union between two people who vow to love and honor each other, til death do they part. Love and Honor knows no boundaries of gender. They deserve the sames rights as all americans.

...unless, of course, you believe that God gave you his proxy to speak on his behalf. If that is the case, you need to join a different institution.

This is a tough question. Almost as tough as the question of abortion.  And normally, as I have with the abortion question, I would default to allowing people to make their own decisions in that regard.  I don't approve of abortion myself but I won't stand in the way of someone making that decision for themself.

But the gay issue is different.  To me.

I don't believe gays are born that way.  I don't believe there are some who are genetically predisposed and designed to desire to share themself with another of their same gender.  Still, even though I don't approve of that lifestyle, I have no objection to leaving that decision to those individuals.  But that's not the issue here.

In effect, legalizing and sanctioning that type of lifestyle gives it a blanket of acceptance in our culture.  And that's something I can't force myself to do.  There are many things I can look the other way about but this type of lifestyle, in my opinion, does not deserve our approval or our sanctioning it in any way, shape or form.  I can't imagine making it possible for people to look upon that type of lifestyle as acceptable and common.  I can't allow myself to be a part of letting children look upon that lifestyle as anything other than wrong.

And that's what passing such a law would do.  Give it legitamacy.

Sorry ... can't go there. 

I would like to see the government get out of marriage altogether. Any two adults should be able to go to their county seat and register a civil union. Civil union gives all couples the same rights and responsibilities. Civil unions also demand legal dissolution. Once a couple registers for a civil union then they can marry with a religious ceremony or not. Marriage is a religious ceremony and therefore a personal matter. We castigate gays because they live a promiscuous lifestyle while denying them the right to marry.
A hundred years ago we ridiculed African-Americans for being ignorant but we kept them from formal education.

I have been married for 30 years and while I am a social liberal I am very conservative in my personal life. That's my choice. Personal morals and ethics can't be dictated.

Life is complicated, love is simple. We need to protect and nurture love as it is the foundation of that life.

The California people have lived with gay marriages happening for almost 6 months, and yet the world hasn't ended. The U.S. Constitution declares separation of church and state people, so why do you use the Bible as reason to back the denial of a person's right? It also said we ought not to blend fabrics in clothes, and to stone rape victims, yet I don't see a single Christian condemning either of these.

Separate but equal was overruled 54 years ago. It's a shame that people have forgotten the true meaning behind that.

If government wishes to continue to be in the business of marriage, then everyone must have the opportunity to marry whomever they choose.   I'm actually for all of the legal, financial benefits of "marriage" being given to all, hetero and homosexuals, in a civil union.  Let the church's "marry" that way if the church wishes to only marry heterosexuals they can do that; but, it won't affect gay people's ability to have equal protection under the laws.  And for the person who said leave it to the states, there are so many federal benefits given to "married" people, it's astonishing; so, the federal government may leave some of it up to state's but then they jump in to the mix with both feet by creating special tax laws, inheritance laws, etc for married folks.

Homosexuality is a decision that goes against the laws of nature and God.  With that said, people have the free will to decide to live whatever lifestyle they want.  Understanding the cause of homosexuality takes an understanding of spiritual warfare and our depraved human nature.  This will be an unpopular opinion, especially on this sight but I do point out that each human is looked up and down on a daily basis and tested.  None of us will ever be perfect or clean in God's eyes regardless of how we live.  I understand now that I was decieved for many years, Jesus Christ has set me free from the lie I used to live.  Human wisdom tells us we can live sexually immoral lives and be perfectly healthy and happy.  I was also happy in my sin but when I took a hard look inside my heart I knew something needed to change, I couldn't do it on my own but when I asked God for help he was faithful.  I stopped listening to human wisdom because men and human understanding will always fail and fall short, God's wisdom and understanding never will.

Frankly, marriage is a commitment of love, and why should we put limits on that?  As for teaching kids about gays, why should gays be any different from the rest of us?  I would hope that all children are taught that love is special without trying to make some love types of love wrong.  I'd rather be raised by a loving gay or lesbian pair than by parents who eventually seperate. I don't know that God specified that marriage is a man and a woman, I'd rather say that God loves us all and that cherishing love is the right thing to do, no matter whether you're gay or straight.

The same rights are honored thru the civil unions, contrary to popular beliefs’ it is not natural.  You show me where, in nature, two same sex animals mate?  Right – you can’t.  It’s a choice. I believe that all have rights but marriage was defined by the church and should be allowed to stay that way.  As for tolerance?  Right, whatever, you wish me to be tolerant but you don’t tolerate what we believe either.