.
Opinion: Inside our scary, society-destroying family
"It’s that love that makes us a family," Marci Weis, bottom right, told her daughter.
February 1st, 2012
06:00 AM ET

Opinion: Inside our scary, society-destroying family

Editor’s Note: Marci Weis is the chief operating officer at a healthcare consulting and care management company in Washington.  She is pursuing a Masters in Divinity degree for ordained ministry in the United Church of Christ.  Weis and her lesbian partner have been together more than 20 years and they have two daughters.

Washington's Senate passed a bill late Wednesday that would allow gay marriage in the Evergreen State. A House vote is expected within days. If it passes both chambers, Gov. Christine Gregoire has promised to sign it into law.

By Marci Weis, Special to CNN

"Mama, if it doesn’t pass, will we still be able to be a family?"

Those were the words of my then-7-year-old daughter on the night of the 2009 election. Over the prior months, sides had been chosen, harsh words had been hurled from all fronts, battle lines drawn. Up for vote was a referendum on whether Washington state would allow gay and lesbian couples to have several of the rights and responsibilities of legally married heterosexual couples. My true love, my lesbian life partner of now 20 years, had watched the debate unfold along with our two daughters. We had heard the harsh condemnation of our relationship, of our family.

And so it has begun again, this time for the legalization of marriage for gays and lesbians in Washington state. The battle has occurred in the legislature and most likely will move to a general election. Again, sides have been chosen and a fair number of my fellow Christians have argued that my love, my family, undermines society by our very existence. While I strongly support marriage equality, the debate over the right for gays and lesbians to marry raises a much more pressing concern for me. Why do my Christian brothers and sisters feel so strongly that my love, my relationship, my family has the power to shred the fabric of our very society?

So I have to ask, do you know my family? We are not unlike many of you. We are a family formed from the foundational love of two people, formed through tentative steps, risks taken and hearts put on the line. We moved from the blush of first love to the challenges of living in union with each other while allowing the other the chance to grow and change. We failed as often as we succeeded, sometimes learning, sometimes not. We made the decision that we were called to be together for the rest of our lives. We shared sacred and holy (though not legal) vows in front of our God, our family and our friends. On that day, we danced in celebration with our community and we danced in celebration with our God.

We chose to start a family. We lived through the heartache of infertility, trying month after month to get pregnant. We lived through the fear, the anticipation and the subsequent shocking and awe-inspiring beauty of holding our newborn daughter in our arms. Twenty months later, we held her sister, tears streaming down our faces as the four of us lay in a hospital bed, marveling at the miracle of life and love. We struggled as new parents. We struggled through a job layoff and the subsequent financial challenges many families with young children face. We struggled to remember that we were in love when faced with two toddlers whose needs were always front and center. We watched our daughters grow and change. Now, as they enter their tween years, my partner and I can begin to see flashes of the women that they are becoming and it scares us, excites us and saddens us.

Through it all, my true love, our two daughters and I have loved each other in that beautiful, flawed and ever-expanding way that we humans love. Through it all, we have tried to be good members of the communities we are blessed to walk in.  Through it all, we have tried to rest peacefully in the beauty of a God that clearly shines through in our love for each other.

"Mama, will we still be able to be a family?" My daughter voiced the fear that had gnawed at her throughout the prior election season. I told her then, "No law, no government will ever take away our love for each other. It’s that love that makes us a family."

Will my partner, our daughters and I still be a family when this current battle is over? I have faith that we will be. Will we continue to feel the warm and loving embrace of a God that dances in delight at our family’s love? I have faith that we will.

Is my family really that scary, that dangerous? I do believe that ultimately the fear people have of my family will dissipate and most will recognize the healing and fulfilling power of love, all love, in this world. I have hope that ultimately my fellow citizens in Washington state, and in particular my Christian brothers and sisters, will realize that my family is not that different from theirs.

I have faith also that someday soon, the enormous wedding that my daughters are planning will come to fruition. On that day, the woman who I have been blessed to spend 20 years with will stand with me in front of our family, our friends, our faith community, our God and our children and we will reiterate sacred and holy vows. We will dance in celebration with our community and our God.

I have faith that day will come, soon. It had better. My daughters have already picked out my gown.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Marci Weis.

Posted by
Filed under: Community • Family • Relationships • Religion • Sexual orientation • What we think • Where we live
soundoff (1,027 Responses)
  1. MarylandBill

    The tragedy here is that kids are made the victims in these social wars. Obviously gay/Lesbian couples can only obtain children through adoption, through sperm donation (of some broad description) or through a surrogate (i.e., for men). Now obviously kids need adoption, but in the other two cases, you often end up with children who are left to wonder who their father or mother is. If you think it isn't going to happen you should check out how many adults are now tracking down the sperm donors who are their biological fathers.

    February 1, 2012 at 3:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • iamdeadlyserious

      So are infertile couples also destroying children's lives?

      February 1, 2012 at 3:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • The Nun of Reason

      straight people use these methods more often than gay people.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      It's obviously too much to ask of people like this to think logically and rationally. And since they refuse to think like that they make these random, ridiculous statements that single out gay people saying they should not be allowed to do this or that when straight people are doing the same thing even moreso than gay people.

      This is just another example of the silly, and failed justifications that anti-gay people use to attempt to back up their silly and failed statements. To them gay people shouldn't be allowed to even exist so of course to them it makes sense that gay people not be allowed to take advantage of any and all things that straight people do....but of course to the more rational and thinking people among us, this obviously makes no sense of any kind.

      February 1, 2012 at 4:00 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Sadie

    How many gay people does it take to make a single gay person?

    February 1, 2012 at 3:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • JOE

      IT DEPENDS ON WHERE YOU STICK IT

      February 1, 2012 at 3:26 pm | Report abuse |
  3. james

    Am I the only person who finds the opinion of ANY religon on the subject of the legality of ANYTHING to be irrelevant in a society that has been blessed with the seperation of church and state powers? Those who fear that gay marriage will ruin the state of marriage and family life clearly wish for more control over civil matters being given to their church. I am proud to be the decendant of people who fought a war to live in a country free of religous rule. Far right wingers who seek religon's incorporation into government power are the most dangerous threat to the American way of life. A radical evangelical christian is really only a very small step away from a terrorist in my opinion.

    February 1, 2012 at 3:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bob

      You are not alone, and I agree with you 100%.

      We have a Christian Taliban segment that would lke to establish a theocracy HERE, and NOW, and it won't be any damned different from the Islamic version if they do.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:34 pm | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        You are exactly right about that. It's called the christian taliban!

        February 1, 2012 at 5:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • ben

      Yes if these people feel so strongly about it then they could move to Saudi Arabia or Iran where public policy is based on religious fundamentalism, not so different from the type of fundamentalism some of these people show.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      You are absolutely not the only one! I'm about as anti-religion as they come, but I also differentiate between faith and religion. I say to those who want to believe in whatever god or afterlife they want to can as long as they aren't trying to use those beliefs to implement laws that affect me. Basically, keep the faith, lose the religion.

      As an Atheist obviously I'm not going to agree with any religious person's beliefs – but the biggest difference in this overall issue is that both sides disagree, yet only one side is actually trying to prevent the other from something by law.

      Nobody is out there actively trying to get our government to pass laws banning religion, yet the religious are rabid about geting laws passed banning anything gay. This is the very basic truth that I try to remember in all of this because it proves to me that while both sides disagree, there is very obviously one side in this equation who takes it too far.

      February 1, 2012 at 4:10 pm | Report abuse |
  4. atroy

    Simple solution......stop allowing Christians to marry and breed intolerance.

    February 1, 2012 at 3:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rob

      Please bless us with more of your generalized wisdom!

      February 1, 2012 at 3:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Immoral Majority

      No worries. The tide is changing for better or worse. The idea of community is essentially gone in this Nation. We all used to know our neighbors and have instead gotten to know the people on the flickering box in our living rooms and increasingly in our bedrooms.

      That being said. The problem presented is one of government, not people. Why should the government be allowed to rule your interpersonal life? If we continue to see people we dislike in groups, which is unfortunately reinforced by media (intentionally or unintentionally), people will continue to display thier opinion in a resulting fashion.

      Them versus us is not something that any of us should see within this nation, it's just us.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:24 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Erica

    There is plenty of contract law available to make marriage obsolete for everyone. In fact, I think that's the direction we should take – forget they heart, and put it on paper. All marriages/unions should be a 5 year "Lease for Affection" with the option to renew. If at the end of five years you choose to go your separate ways, no hard feelings and on to the next Lease for Affection. Any agreements entered into during the duration of the lease need to be agreed upon by the parties in writing, i.e., agreements to procreate. This would make more parents accountable for their children. Etc., etc., etc.

    February 1, 2012 at 3:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • Other view

      I'm not going to say the idea is a bad one, because it isn't. But I take an alternative view that doesn't involve increasing paperwork. It costs money for the powers at be to go back over the agreements, which in turn costs all of us.

      Simply put, the government has no right to deny or control interpersonal relationships.

      If anything, simply replace a government granted marriage license with a government granted union license. To be issued to any two consenting adults (limit one at a time).

      February 1, 2012 at 3:40 pm | Report abuse |
  6. the_dude

    Sick people twisting God's will to fit their own selfish desires. These sick freaks are no different than the child-rapist catholic priests. Both are a mockery of God.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • LucyBrik1953

      you r a mockery of god. ya know he wants u down here speaking that way to others? doubtful.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Susan

      You are the sick one.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • asterik

      Yes, so sick for providing a loving and safe home for their children!

      February 1, 2012 at 3:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      Personally I think the very idea of a "god" of any kind is worthy of being mocked.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • The Nun of Reason

      Two consenting adults versus and adult taking advantage of a child.

      Your comparison has no merit.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Alla

      You've brained washed by organized religion.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • hmc719

      i find it so interesting how these so called Christians can be so hurtful, nasty, and the first to name call. You should be ashamed of yourself. God loves all people. Jesus loved all. When he died on the cross he didn't say "this is for you, and you, and you, not you, yes you." I think he would be horrified by your hatred.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:45 pm | Report abuse |
  7. John Smith

    What would the world population be today if we began gay?

    February 1, 2012 at 2:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      What would the world's collective intelligence be if we all began stupid like you?

      February 1, 2012 at 3:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • John Smith

        stupid response to a logical question. Thanks for showing your true intelligence.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • jimm

        A logical question? Right... What would happen if humanity had "begun" completely blind. We probably would not have survived very long, now would we? So should we shun all blind people? There are plenty of people who are born with conditions or features that would not be beneficial for the entire race to have.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • LucyBrik1953

      Happy!..duh

      February 1, 2012 at 3:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • CN Red

      If humans were all born gay, I'm sure humans would have developed social constructs to allow for reproduction.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      Your question was rhetorical; not logical.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • tampaglen

      Fortunately, we're all created differently. Men, women, blacks, whites...we are not a planet of clones. I'm confused as to what exactly the problem is here – gays and lesbians can't get married in the law's eyes and benefit from all the laws that straight couples do because...? That is all they really want, ya know. They don't want to get into churches and religious groups...they want health care benefits and tax breaks. So what?! They deserve it!

      February 1, 2012 at 3:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Truth

      So because someone is gay it means that there would never be procreation for children? A logical question that is full of holes. Are we talking about everyone being gay or just a part of the population? Who knows, until we see it happen, we will never know

      February 1, 2012 at 3:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • S.M.

      Considering your question makes no sense at all I'm assuming you mean what would happen if A) Everyone was gay or B) what if Adam and Eve or whatever you beleive had been gay. Either way, that means very little. Gays and lesbians have been pretending to be straight and having kids since the very begging. Do you honestly think there are magically more gays and lesbians these days? No... if required, because of an intolerant society and/or need for procreation (which with current over-population issues is not needed) gays and lesbians can find a way to have kids.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • Edward

      Over 7 billion people on this planet and growing everyday kind of makes your question idiotic and moot.

      Gay marriage isn't going to suddenly make mankind become extinct. Exactly how educated are most of you Christians?

      Seriously. Most of the replies on here by so called Christians makes me think most of you have been smoking Bath Salts or were just born brain damaged.

      February 1, 2012 at 4:04 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Josh

    "Mama, if it doesn’t pass, will we still be able to be a family?"

    You will still be as much of a family as you were on the day you asked that question.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:57 pm | Report abuse |
  9. heepo

    What God hath joined together let no man put asunder" (Matt. xix, 6)

    Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

    Chris tians div orce all the time even though the bible says it's not allowed. Therefore that means chris tians show the world that it's ok to ignore the will of God. And now you're going to claim that gay marriage is against the bible and the will of God ? Isn't that called a heepo creet ? See what happens when you start the slippery slope ?

    February 1, 2012 at 2:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Josh

      Newt G has been divorced a few times, and has committed adultery, but many conservative Christens hold him up as the "poster child" of family values and the Defense of Marriage Act.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:00 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patricia

        Yes Josh, and it is very sad that the people will turn a blind eye to those who fit into their criteria, and condemn those that do exactly the same but are on the other side of the fence. It is self-serving. They just want the republicans to win, no matter what they do, or what they say, or how hypicritcal they are.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:05 pm | Report abuse |
  10. hisloveenduresforever

    oh if the opposers of God would only read his word! then they would see the error of their ways! but the darkness hates the light, because it exposes the ugliness and sin that is mankind. 1 corinthians 1:18 " For the word of God is foolishness to those who are persihing" the bigget lie we can believe is that the one true God who loves all of us despite our sin and perversion would look past it and "celebrate" with us...not at all. his heart mourns for us / Ezekial 33:11 "SAY UNTO THEM. AS I LIVE, SAYS THE LORD GOD, I HAVE NO PLEASURE IN THE DEATH OF THE WICKED; BUT THAT THE WICKED TURN FROM HIS WAY AND LIVE..."

    February 1, 2012 at 2:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bregginkrak

      God gives the word and a choice to follow his word. America should do no less. People can choose the type of relationship and family they want to participate in and Government should ensure that all are provided equal rights and protections.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      Wicked is; living a life inside a closet not coming out for fear of reprisals from people like you. Wicked is; not acknowledging the person that is inside, the person that God created. Wicked is; attempting to force people to live a lie because of some concepts created by people who call themselves disciples, and who lived 2000 years ago. Can we please evolve ???

      February 1, 2012 at 2:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Susan

      You are CREEPY!!

      February 1, 2012 at 3:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      I need no shepherd for I think and reason...and I am not a sheep,
      I shall want only what serves humanity best;
      I lie down in green pastures because I choose to, not because anything makes me.
      I swim in still waters, I need not be led beside them;
      If a soul exists it is mine and is for me to restore how I see fit.
      Paths of righteousness will never fail to lead a person astray…
      especially for His name’s sake.

      I will walk through many valleys, it’s called life;
      the shadow of death follows one and all, no matter where we walk.
      I fear evil;
      evil is created by man, which is to be feared far more than any of the countless versions of god;
      your rod and your staff do not comfort me as they are herding tools...and I am not a sheep.
      I would be arrogant to think goodness and mercy will follow me all the days of my life, for I am human and we make mistakes.
      I shall not dwell in any house that believes me to be nothing more than an animal which must be told where to go and when.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        Wow! Are you a Texas A & M Aggie? Seems that way because they are the only ones that I know that would spend the time it took you to reword a prayer for your own meeting.
        I agree to disagree with you QS, but be careful what you wish for as the saying goes.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:39 pm | Report abuse |
      • sadie 456

        I like your thinking, QS. I do not mind people being religious, I just wish their being 'religious' made them better people!! All we seem to see is that it makes them censorious, self-righteous, overbearing, and (sometimes) fanatically closed-minded.

        February 1, 2012 at 4:25 pm | Report abuse |
      • QS

        Well Rob, if my adaptation isn't to your liking you can always just read the original, which is what I disagree with.

        Sadie – Thanks. Good to know there are others out there who see religion for what it truly is.

        February 1, 2012 at 5:31 pm | Report abuse |
  11. Synapse

    The part that bothers me the most, regarding these initiatives [Prop 8, here in California] is the way that children and young parishioners were pimped out on street-corners. It was as though they were holding a car-wash. If you're a voter and have a baby... definitely carry it on a sling, while YOU protest ! I saw the teen demonstrations [no adults] all over the place.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Lovely

      I saw that too, young children who looked to be no older than 8yrs old holding protest signs. They dont even understand whats going on, why force your beliefs on them?

      February 1, 2012 at 5:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      "They dont even understand whats going on, why force your beliefs on them?"

      Well said Lovely – now apply that statement to the religious community and we might have a decent discussion.

      February 1, 2012 at 5:35 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Bregginkrak

    Boston Redsocks and NY Yankees both play baseball. They play by the same rules, have the same positions, the same number of players, the same officials run the games and they use the same equipment, but one is label the Redsocks and one is labeled the Yankees. They have labels that define tradition. Let's ensure all formal relationships are treated equally under the law, but perserve our traditions. Marriage is man and women. Pick another label for formal relationships not between a man and a woman.

    Family doesn't have to be limited by the label of your relationship. I work with great people, they are my work family.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • pat

      So gays can have a marriage, sort of, as long as they call it something else or wear a uniform that identifies them as gays?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • Bregginkrak

        So my wife and I can tell people we are Gay! I mean if the definition of marriage can be changed, then why not the definition of Gay? We'll march in the parades, we'll go to the clubs and when people ask us what we are doing there we'll say we are Gay.

        Why are we so afraid of labels, of differences?

        February 1, 2012 at 3:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • QS

        So 'separate but equal' is now being paraded around as 'embracing our differences'! Got it.

        Nice try, but this is just a semantics argument over a word, not a tradition. If gay people are eventually granted all the rights and benefits, and responsibilities of marriage, then guess what....it's marriage and nothing else.

        February 1, 2012 at 5:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • Irvin Carney

      Marriage was also once defined as being between a White Man and a White Woman or a Black Man and a Black Woman

      February 1, 2012 at 2:54 pm | Report abuse |
      • wein72

        too bad you cant choose your gender or your race, or else you might have had a point!

        February 1, 2012 at 2:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • Saint Germain

        Too bad you don't choose to be gay, otherwise wein72 would have a point.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:16 pm | Report abuse |
      • K

        Wein chose to be straight...he's really gay though.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:39 pm | Report abuse |
      • S.M.

        The concept of marriage has changed many times throughout history and around the world. It could be purely a religious ceremony with one man/woman could be a man with multiple wives, a group of people, only between people of the same color, etc etc. So at this point, if the government is involved in marriage (which is essentially just a contract between the two people) then it needs to be equal. If you're worried about labels then the government should not perform any type of marriage straight or gay, that's the churches job. The government should only give out civil unions to all people and forget any type of involvement in "marriage." I'm perfectly fine with that.

        February 1, 2012 at 4:12 pm | Report abuse |
  13. bnakka

    Marriages are not out of love. They are not a bond. Marriages have love in them but the american notion of marriage happening because of love is very very inaccurate. Love does not involve finances, it does not involve egos, love defnitely does not cause conflict. Marriage however have all these and some more.

    I would still feel married to my wife even if the government does not give me a tax break or any other benefit. I made a committment and that is good enough for me. Yet, legally I have to prove my marriage so I say everyone should be allowed to marry who ever they want to consentually.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:47 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Liz

    I fully support people like you and your family, who love each other no matter what. This couple has been together for 20 years, which is longer than my parents were when they got divorced. Obviously nothing about marriage is perfect, as many of them don't last. Our country and society has always fought to give equal rights to those that deserve them, and eventually the outcome is always the same: the minority eventually gains the rights and freedoms they deserve. Why are we still fighting this?

    February 1, 2012 at 2:45 pm | Report abuse |
  15. LucyBrik1953

    Its not just about marriage or a little government piece of paper that says 'yay, married'. Its more about equality. And being treated as equal as any other human being. The right to do the same things that everyone else gets to do. I don't give a darn about a piece of paper telling me that I'm married. I give a darn being able to have the same options and opportunities as everyone else, regardless of who i want to marry. If my marriage is going to be miserable, I deserve the right and opportunity to figure that out myself. It is ridiculous we live in a world where we have any many choices, freedoms, technology, and yet some people are not considered as equals because of who they love....shame on you people.....

    February 1, 2012 at 2:43 pm | Report abuse |
  16. anythinggoes

    poly gam ists, in cest uous marriages, beas tial marriages, NAMBLA marriages can all have loving families. They can have loving dedicated relationships. They should also have the right to get married.

    In gay marriage the matter of incest (and producing mut ant off spring) is not possible, therefore inc est is ok in gay marriage.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • SPLAT!~

      Give me your address and I'll send you $5 so you can buy a clue!

      February 1, 2012 at 2:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • mark

      Hey man – Websters called and they want to put your name as the definition of moron.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:50 pm | Report abuse |
  17. pat

    I'm in favor of gay marriage for two reasons: 1) It's only fair and 2) Let those religious people know they don't run the show.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      yes !!!!

      February 1, 2012 at 2:45 pm | Report abuse |
  18. Interested

    somethings fishy . . .

    February 1, 2012 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse |
  19. jane

    Chruch, the screaming lady in little rock 9 did feel bad later on, saw a thing on pbs about it. They interviewed her, this was maybe 20 years ago that I saw it.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • Church of Suicidal

      Thanks. I always wondered.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:57 pm | Report abuse |
  20. glyder

    she's looking for validation by the government because it's not in the bible.like it or not.and why ask the question are we still a family?who is she asking,who is she wanting approval from.government,man.the bible says what it says.i'm a sinner also but i don't see the need to lie to myself or others about it.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      Your. sin. is. illiteracy. really.bad.grammar.and.intolerance.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:32 pm | Report abuse |
      • Susan

        Word! My head hurts from reading that.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Lise Quinn

      Screw the bible! I don't believe in it, I will not live my life according to it. Religion is like a pen!s, it's great that you have one, but stop waving it around in public and quit trying to shove it down everyone's throats!!
      Against gay marriage , then don't have one! I'm against Christianity, so I am not a Christian, but should me not being a Christian prevent you from being one?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • SPLAT!~

        Stop with that rational thinking, your just confusing things.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:38 pm | Report abuse |
      • CN Red

        "Screw the bible!" He he he! Amen to that!

        February 1, 2012 at 3:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Edwin

      glyder: you seem to completely misunderstand. The daughter is upset because others want to call her parents' relationship invalid, not because a law might pass or not. As a child I would have been upset if people had called my parents' marriage invalid or wrong - it was the cornerstone of my definition of our family.

      And as for sinning: I suspect this couple does not consider their relationship sinful. Just because the Bible says we must wear shirts made of hair does not mean christians should do so; likewise, just because a few passages suggest that this kind of relationship is to be avoided does not mean christians must aggressively follow those passages (while ignoring many others).

      February 1, 2012 at 2:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • janebot

      i know there is no way in the world to reason with people who translate the words of the bible into self loathing and hatred...but here i go: glyder the message you missed in the blble was to love your neighbor as yourself. and i bet all the money in bill gates bank account that jesus himself would say to you "hey you got it wrong, its not about sinners – its about all of us being a part of god" however god is defined.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • mark

      typical christian viewpoints – hateful, divisive and moronic. Talk about perpetuation of negative stereotypes.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • Non Christian

        I couldn't agree more. Christians are the biggest hypocrites around.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • Church of Suicidal

      Your sin is murder – you have butchered the English language. Try reading your bible a little less and studying proper punctuation a bit more.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • mary

      This works two ways..
      People that believe the bible is the gospel of God and rules that we must live by are held within.. Believe a certain way.
      Gay people choose to believe another..
      So who's is intolerant..?
      Wow.. it seems gays are just as intolerant of relgion.
      And they think they have every right to be so..
      Go figure..

      February 1, 2012 at 3:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        i think that just about wraps it up! Good words Mary!

        February 1, 2012 at 3:27 pm | Report abuse |
      • txgirl

        I totally agree! Thank you!

        February 1, 2012 at 3:37 pm | Report abuse |
      • whatthewhat

        You have no idea what intolerance means then. It is not intolerant to say "I don't agree with you". It is intolerant to say "You cannot get married because my holy book is better than your holy book and my belief system is better than your belief system."

        February 1, 2012 at 3:48 pm | Report abuse |
      • jimm

        First of all, Christianity (or any other religion) has no place in our government or laws. Get it out. Secondly, gay people are not trying to control the actions of Christians. The christians on the other hand ARE trying to control the actions and rights of other people.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ozymandias71

        Ah, so we should just be 'tolerant' of your religious-bred 'intolerance'? Sorry, don't think so.

        February 3, 2012 at 3:18 am | Report abuse |
    • mary

      This works two ways..
      People that believe the bible is the gospel of God and rules that we must live by are held within.. Believe a certain way.
      Gay people choose to believe another..
      So who's is intolerant..?
      Wow.. it seems gays are just as intolerant of religion.
      And they think they have every right to be so..
      Go figure..

      February 1, 2012 at 3:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • QS

        If you have the right to be intolerant of gay people based on religious beliefs, then we have every right to be intolerant of religions discrimnatory ways. Except, we actually have valid reasons for our intolerance, whereas the only "reason" the religious have is "the bible tells me so".

        Besides, religious people are actually pursuing an agenda that creates laws to prevent gay people from certain things, but nobody is out there actively trying to get laws passed that ban religion – in that, the religious are absolutely on the wrong side of this and always will be.

        February 1, 2012 at 6:15 pm | Report abuse |
  21. Steveland

    Best wishes to you Marci Weis and your family. While many here spread hate her in the name of Jesus/God, I admire you ability to think rationally, pursue human rights and still maintain faith.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • btldriver

      I think the problem here is that people get "marriage" and "civil union" confused. "Marriage" is a religious rite (not right) saying God is blessing the union of two people. God does not bless something that He is truly against. God does not hate the person but he is clearly not happy with some of his children's actions. Think of a parent and their children, usually they still love their children even if the children do things that are wrong. So anyone that says God hates gays is having a problem separating the act from the person.
      A "civil union"on the other hand a marriage with out the the religious overtones, basically a legal contract. The couple still has all of the same rights and privileges of a straight married/civilly joined couple but God is not asked to bless a lifestyle he is against.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:28 pm | Report abuse |
      • whatthewhat

        So non-Christian's can't get married? Buddhists? Glad to know that Christians have the market cornered on it!

        February 1, 2012 at 3:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • hmc719

        Does God hate gays? Where does your book say that? That book that has been translated and rewritten more times than anyone can count. Oh, and many scriptures were written hundreds of years past when the events supposedly happened. I am a Christian who believes in love and respect. Not creating separate classes of people. God loves all.

        February 1, 2012 at 4:13 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ann

        Marriage has nothing to do with religion. Oh, it CAN, if you belong to a church and decide to get married there. My husband and I, though, were married by a justice of the peace. No god involved.

        No one's saying religious organizations should be forced to perform gay marriages. We're saying that the legal protections that my husband and I have (taxes, inheritance, insurance, etc.) should be available to any married couple, gay or straight.

        February 2, 2012 at 4:07 pm | Report abuse |
  22. Dajigga Watkins

    This is a prime example of what happens when church and state are intertwined, and allows the Christian right to promote their agenda.

    GOD HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS!!! This country's forefathers had the intuition to separate church and state, and this should hold true today. God (or the definition of family as allegedly supplied by His teachings) should have no bearing on an individual's fundamental right to marry. Anybody who says differently is a knucklehead.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • JohnR

      The idea of individual rights comes from God.... and anyone who doesn't agree is a double helping of knuckleheadedness, if you like.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:25 pm | Report abuse |
      • Jeff

        Pretty sure people had rights before Christianity and even before the Bible. See "Code of Hammurabi", ancient Greece, Rome, Mesopotamia, etc. Otherwise nice troll...

        February 1, 2012 at 2:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      The idea came from men of the cloth who then wrote it in a book and told the sheeple that it was the word of a creator being. The people rejoiced- hook, line, and sinker. Now go back to church and give them all your money.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • The Stumped

      Have you ever read "endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights" in anything related to the foundation of the USA? Maybe something try to recall on July 4th? If you're going to share your opinion, at least know what you're talking about.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:41 pm | Report abuse |
      • WarhammerTwo

        Yeah, but God didn't tell them what those rights were. The Founding Fathers had to figure them out for themselves. And we've discovered new rights since then. That is, after all, the whole point of ammendments.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • joan

        "endowed by their creator" does not necessarily mean God, but whoever the people believed in. Many of the founding fathers were deists and practiced variations of religions and were not fanatical puritans.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ozymandias71

        '"endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights"

        Yet, when those words were written, women couldn't vote, divorce their husbands, or own their own property when they married. Yet, when those words were written, ANY minority (ethnic, religious, etc) couldn't vote, or in many cases even legally marry or own their own property. Time has expanded ""endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights" to mean what it was actually supposed to mean.

        February 3, 2012 at 3:22 am | Report abuse |
  23. Leo

    Why are family values people trying to break up families?

    February 1, 2012 at 2:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • SPLAT!~

      For the same reason they support Newt!

      February 1, 2012 at 2:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      That's easy....they aren't really "family values" people.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:25 pm | Report abuse |
  24. JohnR

    In the terminology of the Roman Catholic church:

    "Objectively Disordered"

    Despite the lyric Barney the Purple Dinosaur hypnotically recites to children, love is not what makes a family. A man and a woman unite and a child is born to them, and they experience familial love. That's what makes them... a family! This is and always has been "objectively" so. There are other permutations that go by the same name, but they exist through societal forebearance, not by virtue of their objective truth.

    Everyone already knows this. You can put your United Church of Christ fingers in your ears and shout the litergy of "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" until the end of time, but you can't change

    "Objectively Disordered"

    into a family. All you have done is exchange a truth for a lie. And, since you already know and feel the weight of that, it is "natural" for you to seek to stamp out all opposition.

    But it would still be true that your way is

    "Objectively Disordered."

    "My Christian Brothers and Sisters" is a nice phrase when you don't yet have the power....

    I used to think the Tower of Bable story was a little over the top (no pun intended) – I mean, why go to all that trouble in a futile attempt to overcome God? But after many decades on this whirling ball, I have come to realize that even after every voice is silenced (the 20th Century showed it can be done) there will yet be a reproach. Oh how awful for you that moment will be, like Poe's murderer detecting the beat of the TellTale Heart:

    "Objectively Disordered!"

    After you have shoved the last "bigot" into the final cattle car, this blast of recrimination will still be there, along with the call to repent and seek the truth....

    February 1, 2012 at 2:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • MarkinFL

      All that effort based on a fairy tale. Whatever.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • Al

      Well said. Now prepare for the onslaught of hate from those tolerant folks...

      February 1, 2012 at 2:20 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        Because I am sure you are tolerant Al.
        Or is it only the religious that are allowed to be intolerant?

        February 1, 2012 at 2:25 pm | Report abuse |
      • Al's lover

        Al, you are so wise. I bet you are a gun-slingin, bible reading boy straight from a lovely trailer park.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Report abuse |
      • I love Al

        Hi I'm Al's gay lover and I support him in everything he says.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • SPLAT!~

        Geez Al, (if that's your real name), hate on this! (middle finger extended)

        February 1, 2012 at 2:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      You start off with the false premise that the catholic church's idea of what it natural, right or wrong is valid or even relevant. Everything after that just becomes meaningless.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • badcyclist

      Thank you for sharing. We now know something about you: you have a secret stash of very powerful drugs.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • pat

      ...But I'm not Roman Catholic.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:23 pm | Report abuse |
      • Edwin

        Christians think it is intolerance when you want the laws of the United States to reflect everybody's views, not just theirs.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Christine

      A family without love is a sad family. Love should be the center of the family. Your religion may tells you that love is irrelevant, but I do not want a life that lacks love just because that is what you want in your life.
      Barney the Dinosaur sounds a lot nicer and more loving than your God. Both are creations of human imagination. You choose to believe your God, I choose to believe Barney the Dinosaure.
      You choose unhapiness now with the hope of hapiness in the future. I choose hapiness now. You know the saying... one bird in the hand...

      February 1, 2012 at 2:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jillian

      Am I correct to assume that God himself is preaching on this CNN blog! Not a chance in HELL. because he would say, who are to judge, isn't that my job. and where do get off putting people down because they differ from you! Family is defined as a group of people parents and children with unconditional love for one another.
      Go ahead preach away, you are the one who will be harshly judged by god when he asks you why you show such hate and criticism to your fellow brothers and sisters.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • russ

      So, according to this, if married people dont have kids, they are not considered a family? I guess we need to get rid of all rights for people unless they are man, woman, kid. and I'm sure that a mere hundred years ago you would have included white in that sentence.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kasey

      So apparently when a man and woman adopt a child or have a surrogate mother give birth to their kid, they don't have a family, according to your definition. Just because the church has a definition for family doesn't mean that definition holds true for everyone.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Report abuse |
      • frespech

        It depends on what your definition of is, is.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      The catholic church? I thought their idea of love was between a priest and a boy.
      What about a man and a woman who decide NOT to have a baby- they are also a family.
      As is a single person with lots of animals, that's a family.
      Family is a community of loving people who have each other's backs.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      "In the terminology of the Roman Catholic church:"

      Well, it's a damn good thing then that we don't base American law on Roman Catholic terminology, isn't it!

      Goodness, these people!

      February 1, 2012 at 2:29 pm | Report abuse |
      • Guest8

        Thank you.

        I am Roman Catholic, went to Catholic school, and I was still taught to love my brothers and sisters no matter what. Gay, straight, black, white, male, female, if you're human – you have my respect and you have the right to be legally bound (married) to whomever you want. Marriage is an issue for the state, not the church.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • SPLAT!~

      So adopted children will never be a part of a family? Keep it short JohnR, you got BORING!

      February 1, 2012 at 2:31 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patricia

        agreed !!!

        February 1, 2012 at 2:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Al

      I rest my case.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • Edwin

        The purpose of this board is to DISCUSS the topic. JohnR's post had many logical flaws. Pointing out another person's inconsistent arguments is not intolerance - it is good discussion.

        Sorry if you can't distinguish between being told you are wrong and being told you are bad.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Lise Quinn

      Screw the bible! I don't believe in it, I will not live my life according to it. Religion is like a pen!s, it's great that you have one, but stop waving it around in public and quit trying to shove it down everyone's throats!!
      Against gay marriage , then don't have one! I'm against Christianity, so I am not a Christian, but should me not being a Christian prevent you from being one?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • truefax

        Best analogy i've heard.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:39 pm | Report abuse |
      • frespech

        I'm against gays but that doesn't mean you'r not gay.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • truefax

      Show me a man that says "this is the TRUTH" based on his FAITH, and i'll show you a FOOL.
      Faith is not certainty, religion by it's very definition is based on FAITH.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • jk105

      Too bad a man and woman beyond child-bearing years can't marry–at least according to your definition of family. The one who needs to repent is you and the false god you invoke to support your bigotry.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Loren

      Just out of curiosity, what would the church say about people who think it's okay to diddle children? I believe they would call that "objectively disordered", huh? At least, if being gay is, then being a pedophile should be also eh? So why then are SO MANY of your church's leaders doing kids? Even more disgusting, many of the kids they are pleasuring themselves with are "altar boys" ie mass attendants. So apparently, it's okay to abuse the little kids who are helping them to SERVE AT THE ALTAR OF G_D. If that is okay in their eyes, what the heck is wrong with gay marriage?

      People who are doing little kids have NO BUSINESS telling a loving family that they are "objectively disordered".

      February 1, 2012 at 3:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • Church of Suicidal

      John R.

      Don't want to put you in a cattle car / exterminate you (yeah, THAT'S a valid comparison). Don't even want to convert you – keep your ignorance if you like. Just want you to stay the Freddie Uncle Charlie Katie out of everyone else's business. Pillock.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:19 pm | Report abuse |
  25. pat

    Don't make laws in this country based on what the bible says or doesn't say because I don't believe in your religion.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Goose66

      I agree. But that begs the question: what is the source for such laws, especially one that defines a religious term such as "marriage." Would it not be the collective morality of the people. As long as equal rights are guaranteed to gay and lesbian couples by the law, why does one desire to have the officially sanctioned term of "marriage" applied to their relationship. I just don't understand the argument.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:13 pm | Report abuse |
      • SPLAT!~

        Marriage, civil union, who gives a crap, just give them equal rights!

        February 1, 2012 at 2:15 pm | Report abuse |
      • pat

        If you don't understand the argument then just give gays full marriage like anyone else and the problem will go away.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:19 pm | Report abuse |
      • MarkinFL

        Marriage is far older than your religion. You define your marriage your way, I'll define mine my way. I am married and it has nothing to do with your church or your religion and never will. I do not care at all what you or your religion thinks of my marriage and neither should the government.

        BTW, I am hetero, married with children and FULLY support gay marriage. I believe it strengthens family.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:19 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ryan Loveless

        Religion =/= laws. The whole basis for religion is to allow for those who have no faith to have faith. A basic code of morals if those can not make their own.

        Laws govern the stability of society. That is all.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:26 pm | Report abuse |
      • Christine

        MarkinFL: Right on!!! I agree with you 100%.
        Why can't I click "like" for your comment?

        February 1, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Report abuse |
      • Edwin

        If you prohibit them from marrying, then you are (by definition) not giving them the same set of rights.

        "Separate but equal" never worked in race relations, because it simply doesn't work. So it doesn't work for marriage, either.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:47 pm | Report abuse |
      • IMHO

        My religion permits and encourages gay and lesbian marriages.
        Why is your government interfering with MY right to practice my religion?

        February 1, 2012 at 6:50 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ann

        Markin, you rock.

        Civil union is a second-class alternative. Separate but NOT equal. If it's the same thing, why don't straight people feel satisfied with that?

        This is why my husband and I chose to get married. We lived together for 5 years first, so why change? Because we wanted to be married. Civil union was not what we wanted. We had a civil service, by a justice of the peace, but we are married. That makes a difference to us, just as it would to any gay couple.

        February 2, 2012 at 4:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      "The whole basis for religion is to allow for those who have no faith to have faith. A basic code of morals if those can not make their own."

      And here again we see on full display the arrogance of the religious who assume that one with no faith MUST have faith. And that they honestly believe religion and morality are synonymous is laughable because they are not. One does not ever need to be even introduced to religion or any idea of a "god" in order to be a moral person – it's this fallacy that the religion corporation perpetuates because enough people buy into the gimmick that it keeps the pews and collection plate full.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:36 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        I agree that is false but for different reasons than QS.
        The basis for religion is to develop a personal relationship with the creator and share that with others. To set an example for others to be wonder, question, or follow.
        All of us fall short of being the perfect example.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:17 pm | Report abuse |
  26. sickoftheblather

    Forget the gay part for a second. If we let the government decide which marriages are valid and which are not, where will it stop? There was a time when inter-racial marriage was illegal, some states had those laws until the 60's and people used the religion to justify it, moreover, there are many who would have those laws return if they could. Should it come up for a debate again? Of course not because that would be crazy talk. What about inter-faith marriages, some religions say that those kinds of marriages are not valid using again the same argumentsm should we legislate this and invalidate these kinds of marriages. What about divorce, many religions shun it, should we outlaw it? Should we allow the government to tell us that we have to stick with a marriages because our religious morals say it's wrong? Should we let the government decide that Christian should only marry Christian, Muslims only Muslims and so on? And what kinds of Christians should be allowed to marry, because there are many different kinds of Christians out there, should we define the one true Christianity and make that the predominate one that underscores our values, legally speaking. OK, which one will it be? Catholic maybe, Baptist, Southern Baptist, Mormon etc. etc. etc. which one will it be?

    February 1, 2012 at 2:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • doughnuts

      You are raising non-existent boogeymen. The marriage certificates issued by the state have absolutely nothing to do with any religion, aside from letting clergymen solemnize and officiate at weddings. Judges, justices, magistrates, and even boat-captains (in some states) can do the same. Heck, even I can and I got "ordained" on-line.
      The only effect religious rules have on marriage is in that religious community. The state does marriages, churches just do weddings.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • MarkinFL

      And if the churches and American Taliban would back off, the government could get on with properly recognizing gay marriage as well.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:21 pm | Report abuse |
  27. lowell

    PROPAGANDA

    February 1, 2012 at 2:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      What, religion? I agree.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:38 pm | Report abuse |
  28. George Washington

    Will you still be a family if it doesn't pass? I hope so, or you are not a family right now.
    Family is not something that you can restrict, it happens. Marriage is another thing entirely.

    February 1, 2012 at 2:03 pm | Report abuse |
  29. Ryan Loveless
    February 1, 2012 at 2:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Goose66

      I am a little sorry that you have explained the situation to your daughters in such a way that they (like you) need this officially sanctioned term "married" to be applied to you by the State in order for you to have a real family. Go to your liked-minded Christian bretheren and have a ceremony and live your lives together in peace. If the more traditional Christian majority wants to retain a different meaning for the term "marriage," why should you or your daughters care?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • MarkinFL

      The Christians do not own the term. What right do they have to control ANYTHING about marriage. People of all religions and no religion get married for their own reasons and the Christians have nothing to say about it.
      Why should they NOT be allowed to be married just because SOME other people do not approve? No different than restricting inter-racial marriage. The arguments against it were almost identical and made by the same people.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:23 pm | Report abuse |
  30. Linda K

    Lovely and insightful article. I hope you get your big wedding very soon!

    February 1, 2012 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
  31. Scott

    Of course you will be a family, and whether or not a law passes does not change it one way or another. A family is based in love.

    That said, I think that the concerns of election night issues are probably not things you want to worry your seven year old over. She should never have had that concern in the first place. Let her be a child. Soon enough she won't have that luxury.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      I'm not really understanding this argument about not "subjecting" a 7 year-old to things he/she may honestly be concerned with all by themselves.

      Yes kids should be able to be kids, but we also don't typically give kids enough credit for the things they actually hear and understand and perceive as something that can affect them directly.

      But people are making this seem like the parents physically forced their kid to sit and watch every minute of news coverage regading this issue.....something more religious parents do by forcing their kids to sit in church and actually try to understand something beyond their comprehension – so unless you're suggesting that religious parents stop forcing their children to go to church because they should just be allowed to be kids, your analysis makes no sense.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • Christine

      Children are young, they are not stupid.
      They deserve answers to their questions. They know when people around them are worried about something.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:30 pm | Report abuse |
  32. jdj

    The tragedies in this story pile up. It is sad to see someone so deluded.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jamie

      And I bet you have all the answers right? I think it's far more deluded to see someone living a perfectly productive, loving and safe life and turn your nose up at them.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      "It is sad to see someone so deluded."

      Excellent – perhaps now you have a shred of understanding as to why people who are not religious feel the same way about religious people.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • rick

      Yes. It is quite sad that YOU are so delusional.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:12 pm | Report abuse |
  33. SB

    While we have a loving God, He is not one that will overlook disobedience. And he has proven it from the beginning of time. He speaks to us through His Word. Read Romans chapter six if you think these choices are ok. You are literally making your own idol god if you say things are ok that He says are not. We all stuggle with something and I sympathize but in the end Jesus is the judge, not us, from either direction. The only way we know what choices to make are by what He tells us in the Word. He designed family and communicated it clearly. Anything else is disobedience.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      Then do tell us what Jesus said about gays.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • SB

        It would be better if you read it for yourself.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:05 pm | Report abuse |
      • SPLAT!~

        Cedar Rapids = 1
        SB = 0

        February 1, 2012 at 2:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        Funny thing is, I havent actually been shown anything that he did say.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • Christine

        Christians are supposed to follow the teaching of Christ. Yet, most continue citing parts of the old testament to push their ideas. Shouldn't Christians follow the new testament?
        Christ said nothing about gays. All this hatred comes from the old testament that also bans eating shrimp and wearing mixed fibers (amongst other things). So I guess if all gays are sinners going to hell, so are all people eating shrimp and wearing the wrong clothes. Heaven must be a rather sad empty place.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • SPLAT!~

      Fornicate with your dead brothers wife but don't spill your seed!

      February 1, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jesus

      God is a lie made up to keep simple people like yourself in line

      February 1, 2012 at 2:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • James

        Could not have said it better myself.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:05 pm | Report abuse |
      • SB

        I feel badly for you. You must explore the Truth.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:11 pm | Report abuse |
      • Susan

        LOLZ!

        February 1, 2012 at 2:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • pat

      If God is all powerful, then why can't he just control his anger against gays?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • Doh

      And God made the world in 6 days, right? What about the Solar System, was that in the 'lost testament'?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • hisloveenduresforever

        oh if the opposers of the bible would actually read Gods word! then they would see the light...but then again he says "the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing" 1 corinthians 1:18. gods love is eternal and if you read the book of genesis, he never said he created the solar sytem in that weeks time he speaks of creating the earth.- The biggest lie we can believe is to think God in his great love for us can look past our sins and "celebrate" our sin with us... mention God you people agree but mention Jesus people get angry- why? because there is power in his name.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • j

      God says shut up, he can speak for himself.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      "While WE have a loving god..."?!

      Yet again we see illustrated just how arrogant religious people can be to think that just because they believe something means, obviously, that everybody else does (and should) as well.

      It also seems like we have yet another zealot here who would say til they're blue in the face that "god" gave us all free will....and yet, we must ignore that free will because we mustn't disobey. What a crock. I'll never understand how so many people can be so illogical to actually believe most of the nonsense that religion provides.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • MikeMazzla

      You sound like a freaking nutcase SB. get a clue

      February 1, 2012 at 2:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • sadie 456

      When your beliefs are a result of your own experience and inner discovery, rather than parroting what you read in an ancient book written by mortals and heavily revised after Christ, THEN you can look down your nose at me.

      February 1, 2012 at 5:05 pm | Report abuse |
  34. Rob

    "Americans will look upon you with the same shame and horror we currently do when reading or viewing accounts of the activities of segregationists of the Civil Rights Era."

    Easy there. Some simlarities but not exactly the same. I don't see LBGT's getting raped, murdered, hung from trees. Not the same. Sorry. You might get bullied at school or work, and maybe spit on or refused service. I don't think you can equally compare them or how people will feel in the future.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Btru

      Actually in certain places LGBT people get murdered, raped, hung from trees, etc. Places like Afganistan, Iraq, Somalia, etc.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jamie

      Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not happening. Gays are bullied and beaten up all the time, right here in this country. So continue to live with your eyes closed and claim that it's not happening.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:00 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        The post said that they would be reveired the same. I call that into question. There is abuse, and I am not talking about other countries. To say they are exactly the same and will be looked apon the same way is a HUGE leap.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        To say they are exactly the same and will be looked apon the same way is a HUGE leap.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • MarkinFL

        I for one already look upon them that way. I see no difference. LGBT have been abused and murdered and treating like cr@p for a very long time. Only now is that changing.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • pat

      Then where did the term gay bashing come from?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:06 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        Bigots. I never said there is no abuse. LGBT's were not sold as slaves and we did not fight a civil war for their freedom.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • anonymous

      Are you serious? Perhaps you've never heard of Matthew Shepard... that kind of violence DOES happen – every day. Do your research before you start wailing about things you don't know anything about.
      http://www.matthewshepard.org/our-story

      February 1, 2012 at 2:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • j

      wait, WHAT? gays have absolutely been raped, beaten and murdered for who they are. In fact, someone is probably getting the ish kicked out of them for being gay right now. Were you serious? You can't be serious.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • j

        and I mean in the US of A, nevermind the atrocities happening in other countries

        February 1, 2012 at 2:13 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        I never said there isn't abuse. However, if you think it is the same level as the abuse of blacks in this country that led to civial rights in the 60's, you need to do some research.
        LBGT's should be thankful for what civial rights activists did no the 60's, but personally do now see them as equal.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • torqueflite

      Rob, perhaps you've never heard of Matthew Shepard, Brandon Teena, Lawrence King, David Kato, the up to 6,000 gay men of the Holocaust concentration camps or many, many others. Look up some of these stories if you think gay people aren't killed just for being gay. Harvey Milk was probably murdered for not supporting Dan White on the SF Board of Supervisors, but White would likely not have gotten off on a lighter manslaughter charge had one of his victims not been gay supervisor Milk.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        Stick with this country please. I am well aware of what happened in Nazi Germany and what happens around the world. I never said there wasn't abuse going on.
        If this was a case of black civil rights form the 60's. She would not be worried weather or not the bill will pass. She would be worried that her house would be burned down, or she would be raped walking down the street, or she would be hung from a tree in her yard, or shot for the sport of it, or told to call her boss Master, sit in the back of a bus, use a seperate bathroom or resturant. Is that really what all LBGT's face today?
        Sorry it is not the exact same thing. I think the comparison is weak.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:45 pm | Report abuse |
      • torqueflite

        Again, there was indeed systemized persecution of gay people whether you are aware of it or not. No, there is not likely to be another Stonewall riot because the laws that allowed police to arrest gay people simply for operating a bar that catered to them have been struck down. What you appear not to know is that the modern rights struggle dates to the 1960s as well – if, as you argue, it's so much better for LGBT today, it's because we stand on the shoulders of the activists who fought at Stonewall, who argued the cases of Romer v. Evans (1996) and Lawrence v. Texas (2003) and who are still today fighting for the rights of gay couples to marry. Again, read some modern US social history – the Civil Rights movement spawned both Womens Rights and Gay Rights in the 1960s.

        February 1, 2012 at 4:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • doughnuts

      Matthew Sheppard called and said-

      No wait. He didn't call. He can't call.

      Because he was beaten to death for being gay.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jess

      Ever heard about Matthew Shepard? His murder in the late 90s was tragic. It was done because he was gay

      February 1, 2012 at 2:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • torqueflite

      Rob: as for rape, two men in NY last year were brutally assaulted by a gang using broomsticks and other objects when it was discovered that they were gay. In Richmond, CA, several years ago, a young woman was pulled from her car and gang-raped by men who saw the rainbow stickers on her bumper and decided to "fix" her. Throughout the world, rape is a weapon used as a "corrective" for both men and women.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:18 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        Of course there is violence and abuse from narrow minded bigots.
        The majority of LBGT people do not suffer the same level of abuse that blacks lived through. In the COUNTRY.

        If you are not old enough to remember the 60's. Do some research. Believe me, you will realize it is not the exact same.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • torqueflite

        Rob, I lived through the 60s and have studied the Civil War, Reconstruction, Jim Crow and the Civil Rights Movement so don't attempt to lecture me about this. If you mean that there was systemized segregration, yes, everyone knows about Jim Crow laws. There were also, until 2003, anti-sodomy laws in most states of the US until they were overturned by the SCOTUS decision Lawrence v. Texas. These laws permitted systemized persecution of gay people for gathering at bars or even dressing in the "wrong" clothes. The fact that you don't know this history simply speaks to your ignorance. If you want to debate the issues intelligently, I suggest you educate yourself about them first.

        February 1, 2012 at 4:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kristen

      We do get murdered. Matthew Shepard wasn't hung from a tree, just tied to a fence and murdered. And in our recent past the Klu Klux Klan didn't just go after black people, but Catholics and Gays.

      It's better than it's ever been, but it's still scary.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kimball

      actually, gay people do get raped, murdered,and hung from trees in the U.S.A too. And often times they are doing it to themselves (suicide) because the emotional trauma from christian bullies is too much to bear. That in itself is equally hard as the civil rights blacks fought for.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:41 pm | Report abuse |
  35. ELR

    As the parent to my niece for 14 years, I can tell you that biology doesn't make you a family and putting strict terms on what a family should look like often harms those who had no choice in the matter. Despite having two graduate degrees and earning more than I technically need to raise a child, and despite having a sister with Cerebral Palsy not a drug addict as assumed, my family is often taken to be something less than it is--INCREDIBLY SUCCESSFUL. Raise your own family and quit worrying about other families.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:52 pm | Report abuse |
  36. tribecagal

    Your fellow CHRISTIANS feel your family undermines society by its very existence and has the power to shred the fabric of society because they presume to be the arbiters of what is morally correct. They bought the "party line" and have abdicated thinking for themselves and forming their own opinions preferring to be hateful, narrow minded, fear mongering lemmings.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:51 pm | Report abuse |
  37. Tonya

    In one way I feel sorry for this people ... If you know God deeply – you will never be lesbian or gay , that's for sure ! God love people ,but hate sins!!!

    February 1, 2012 at 1:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      god needs to get over himself, take an anger management class or something.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • SPLAT!~

      I like oranges but hate orange, big deal!

      February 1, 2012 at 1:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rebecca

      So, by your words Gods love is unconditional, except..

      but if there are exceptions then God's love is not unconditional. logical falicy much?

      February 1, 2012 at 1:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      From what I understand about the concept of GOD, is that he/she is a creator being; omnipotent, omnipresent, and all-knowing. I fail to see, Tonya, how you could even conceive of IMAGINING to know what such a being is thinking; assuming that creator beings have human qualities- which I emphatically refute. GOD, if he or she exists, is WAY out of your realm of understanding... but go on deluding yourself that you know all about it.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • weird'al

      So you know god deeply enough and still admit we are the only living species in this universe?

      February 1, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dex

      I feel sorry for you Tonya, who still hold to your outdated bronze age sky-fairy, and are closed minded to the simple act of loving.
      Wake up, and be happy and free from whatever delusions you have.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Tori

      Tonya, you are either sick or totally uneducated and uncultured. Go back to your trailer and slump on your sofa. Stop making such stupid comments.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dr. Tom

      Tonya, I am afraid you have wasted your life – get out of that cult and do something... or just disappear.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Go girl

      Tonya,
      One day every tongue will confess and one day every knee will bow to the Lord God in Heaven, and you and me will be there cheering them on!

      February 1, 2012 at 2:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        How do you figure that? I mean I ask because those that condemn and judge are also banned from entering heaven so guess where you and Tonya are going.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patricia

        Yay !!!
        I could not imagine anything more annoying than that. I think I prefer to be in hell. I heard the party rocks and the people are much more interesting and worldly. Plus, there's pizza.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • Geneva1

      I totally understand what you mean Tonya!

      February 1, 2012 at 2:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • j

      Funny, then, that God keeps making gay people.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • Church of Suicidal

      Dear Tonya,

      There is a famous picture from the civil rights era of the Little Rock 9 on their way into their new high school. You share a lot with the screaming white woman behind them. I've always wondered if she felt ashamed later on in life. Did she become more tolerant? Or was she filled with hate and self-righteousness until her death? How will you look back on your views?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:25 pm | Report abuse |
      • Bob

        The white woman screaming at the Little Rock 9 actually became friends with the black girl she was screaming at. They used to do community talks together on the evils of racism. Than, a few years ago, she went ultra right wing and stopped talking to her friend. Before that happened, she did express sorrow and shame at her actions.

        February 1, 2012 at 4:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Geneva1

      Why does God make gay people? This question can also be asked of why God makes liars, adulterers, and theifs.
      Answer:
      God didnt make us this way, Adam and Eve's sin made us this way. They are all sins, therefore they are wrong.

      Also, in the Bible it doesnt say it is wrong to be gay, it says it a sin to act on these feelings of lust towards the same gender. God wants us to reject our human desires and get something better- a lifestyle surronded by Him.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • Taxx

      Yes, God hates sin.
      He hates gays. He hates people who eat shrimp. He hates people who wear clothes from mixed fabric. He hates the abolition of slavery. He hates that the earth is round. He hates birth control (even in the case of polycystic ovarian syndrome).
      Wow. Turns out God is a lot more hate than love.
      But wait, all that is in the Old Testament, not the new one, right? So Christians who follow Christ should look at the New Testament, not the old one. That is why eating shrimp is not a crime/sin any more, and they can also wear cotton/silk blouses without fear. And people don't seel their daughters into slavery. So why is it that they still are terrified of gay people who are not even mentioned in the New Testament?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:44 pm | Report abuse |
      • Geneva1

        Romans 1:26-28 🙂

        February 1, 2012 at 3:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • janebot

      marci – stay strong, stay together and be good parents – no matter what the haters and bible thumpers say – you are paving the way for future generations who will look back and wonder why people were so "unevolved" in 2012 before LGBT marriage was legal. xoxo

      February 1, 2012 at 2:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • guest

      you are so very ignorant.God created gay people the same way you were created. it is not a choice (who would choose to be so hated??) people are born gay or straight. God loves all of his/her creation and God cannot make mistakes, as God is omnipotent. therefore, God loves gays. the only sin here is that people like you cannot understand this simple truth and twist God's intentions to meet your agenda. leave judgement to God and live your life with peace and love for all of God's creation, as Jesus tried to teach people like you.

      February 2, 2012 at 1:05 pm | Report abuse |
  38. Patricia

    Oh NOSE! Two productive memebers of society; in love; waited for the right time to conceive; raising a happy family; fighting for the rights of life, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness. They sounds like stand-up citizens to me.
    Meanwhile in the Justice section we will read stories of other couples who tortue, maim, and kill their children.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:50 pm | Report abuse |
  39. Tim

    Regardless of how I, or any other one individual feels about the issue of gay marriage, the bigger problem here is allowing a small group of people (as in the state legislature) to decide the outcome of such an important issue. Issues such as this belong on a ballot, and should be voted on by the people, not by your for-sale state legislature.

    Many on these comments are mocking religion, and it's dictatorial properties. I don't disagree with that logic, but the same applies to government. It is unpatriotic, IMO, to blindly follow a few people simply because they are called "government". Think, question, and allow the decision process, and thus the power, to be placed back into the hands of the people where it belongs. We as Americans willfully give up so much of our liberty to the government. Gay people, OB-Gyns that perform abortions, religious groups....these won't be the downfall of our society. A runaway government that continues to erode our liberty will. I pledge allegiance to the flag, and to the United States of America. NOT to an individual legislature.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dawn1257

      "Issues such as this belong on a ballot, and should be voted on by the people, not by your for-sale state legislature."

      Tim, if the issue of civil rights were voted on by the populace in 1964, the very real chance that it would NOT have passed exists. Sometimes, issues about peoples rights are above the level of popular vote and entrusted to those we vote to office in our representation. This is where we are at today on the issue of gay marriage.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • MarkinFL

      We are a country of laws based upon the Consti.tution. We are a democratic republic, not a democracy. The Consti.tution was designed to protect minority views and rights. Your method would destroy that.

      I'll take the original design of our country over yours any day of the week.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cliff

        The gay marriage issue should be decided by the voters at the ballot box. Every state gets one chance – if the voters say that marriage is between a man & a woman, then that's it.

        No recall votes. No 'do-overs'. No judicial or legal proceedings to overturn it.

        Nothing.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:58 pm | Report abuse |
  40. Sao

    LUST....LUST...CHOICE...CHOICE

    February 1, 2012 at 1:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      that evil evil choice, how dare people have the ability to choose how to live their lives, oh the shame.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ben

        The issue isn't that people can't choose how to live their lives...it is that they choose to try and change the traditional view of marriage (Between man and women) and family to become something that it is not. Erode our values and our country will be in for a world of trouble. Keep marriage and families sacred...it is between husband and wife man and women and I DON'T want to ever give that up. You can chose how you want to live but don't try and redefine something as important as marriage and families to include your unnatural views

        February 1, 2012 at 2:00 pm | Report abuse |
      • SPLAT!~

        The concept of 'marriage' is an unnatural view. Where else in nature are there marriages?

        February 1, 2012 at 2:04 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        Then dont ever give it up then Ben, thats your choice......hey look, you have a choice.
        And there is nothing 'sacred' about marriages and families.....the concept is one that has determined by society, and society is also the one that 'redefine' it if it chooses.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • TRH

        BEN, Just one question.

        Are you this adamant about all the millions of Hetro couples who cheat, divorce, beat their kids, and in so many ways act as a TERRIBLE family?

        I don't see the outrage there. I don't see the "degredation of the morality of the world" there. Why no outcry about that?

        The couple in this article, love one another, respect one another, raise their daughters with values, and are loyal to one another for 20 years....and yet THEY'RE the problem?

        Kim Kardashian, and all those like her, are the problem. Refocus your energy towards couples that ACTUALLY lead a poor life not those who just have a different chromosomal make-up than a male-female marriage.

        So what if it's two women. It's TWO HUMAN BEINGS WHO LOVE ONE ANOTHER and have devoted their lives to being together in celebration of that love.

        That's a rarity in today's world and should be applauded.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • Everything in Moderation

        You don't want to give up what, Ben? The privilege of marriage? The status? The rights? What is it that you would lose if other people were married besides yourself?

        What if the people who were legally married (with a licence that used the word "marriage") were NOT Christian? What if they were atheist and considered nothing AT ALL about that word to be sacred? Are they still okay to use it? Has your own marriage suffered because there are atheists out there holding marriage certificates?

        February 1, 2012 at 2:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • SPLAT!~

      It's called free will, god supposedly gave it to you. Let him make the judgement, not you!

      February 1, 2012 at 1:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dotonenomo

      And I'll bet you are also someone who would vote for Newt Gingrich, who is on his third wife after sleeping around on the first two. Now THAT is a moral mentor for the country! I'm sick of your convenient excuses to hate people. That generally is evidence of some fear within yourself that you have the same feelings.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:17 pm | Report abuse |
  41. Kenny of Salt

    How about we allow same-gender marriage and at the same time allow straight people to wear rainbows again?
    It's a win-win!

    Peace

    February 1, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Everything in Moderation

      Straight people wear rainbows. I think if more of them did life would be way nicer. All over Europe, people have rainbow flags to symbolize diversity and acceptance of cultures, etc.. Nice.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:50 pm | Report abuse |
  42. glyder

    using your kid for a shield.nice.she's going to have to defend polygamy or risk being a hypocrite.that never seems to be brought up.i wonder why.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • SPLAT!~

      What's wrong with polygamy?

      February 1, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      how is she using her child as a shield?

      February 1, 2012 at 1:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Everything in Moderation

      First: It's brought up all the friggin' time. By people just like you. Over and over, regardless of what is said. It's a broken record of not listening to the response and then pretending there isn't one so you can look all smart and stuff.

      Second: Polygamy such as that pursued by the break-away mormons is not the same in the least. You might as well be saying that gay=pedo…in fact, I think you are.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:53 pm | Report abuse |
  43. The Bodacious

    If marriage is a solely religious principle, why can judges marry people. court-room judges are not people of the cloth. We must free ourselves from the tyranny of church in state!

    February 1, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • Peter

      better get yerself together
      join the human race

      February 1, 2012 at 2:58 pm | Report abuse |
  44. Sao

    GROSS!!!!I'M YOUR MIND IS NOT YOU'RE NOT OUT!
    GAY=CHILD MOLESTER-GROSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

    February 1, 2012 at 1:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • SPLAT!~

      MED TIME!

      February 1, 2012 at 1:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • QS

        More like padded cell time! 🙂

        February 1, 2012 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shakti

      What the eff is wrong with you????

      February 1, 2012 at 1:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kristen

      Wow. That makes absolutely no sense. Did you mean to use all caps and yell?

      February 1, 2012 at 3:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ozymandias71

      CAPS LOCK IS NOT REQUIRED! SERIOUSLY!!

      February 3, 2012 at 3:33 am | Report abuse |
  45. johnbeer

    Still be a family? It must be a family in the first place to remain a family. This "family" does not qualify. A liberal's idea of a family: a bunch of people under the same roof.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      parents, kids. seems to meet the criteria to me.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • SPLAT!~

      Don't like it? Tough!

      February 1, 2012 at 1:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Susan

      2 loving parents, 2 kids, probably a dog. That's a family in every sense of the word. And you're an idiot.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Report abuse |
      • Bill the Cat

        Why only 2 parents? Why can't there be 4 or 5? Why can't I marry 20 people and they all share my benefits?

        February 1, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
      • SPLAT!~

        Bill, no reason at all.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        If you want to campaign to change the law for that then Bill then go right ahead, its your right to try.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • Peter

        You're redefining everything. Marriage, family, parent. That's called lying. One of these two deviants might be a parent of these children, but the other pervert contributed nothing to their creation. One parent. No father. Yeah, that's a real family. I guess the dog fills in for a dad.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • Taxx

        Peter... following your way of thinking, adopting a child does not make the child part of a family because he/she is not genetically related to the adults in the family?
        You are a sad person. Very very sad.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:50 pm | Report abuse |
      • Peter

        Adoption is a special case; bringing a child into a normal family with mother and father, all to the childs benifit, no selfish reasons in this activity. Comparing that with this sociopathic behavior is weak.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Zenichi-Maro

      Right. So, an interracial couple with adopted children and, say, a non-related dependent to whom they offer love and care is not a family. It's only a family is some d-bag like yourself says it is? How about you shut the front door and just take care of your own. You are NOT in a position to tell this fine lady–or ANYone else, for that matter–what a family is. You can have your opinions, but opinions are like anuses; everyone has one, and all of them stink.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Report abuse |
      • Peter

        Yeah, she's a real fine lady, one that degrades and defiles herself with another women, and will surely think nothing of passing the practice on to the unwitting children she's "parenting".

        February 1, 2012 at 4:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Everything in Moderation

      Your comment, johnbeer, illustrates why this needs to be legalized in the first place. Protection from you.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • The Bodacious

      Commonlaw marriage is legal. You dummy.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      LMFAO! Sometimes I don't know whether to laugh or cry at the complete ignorance and arrogance of conservatives.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • Peter

        If you got an education you wouldn't feel that way. Our civiliztion is built on biblical principals, not philosopies from twisted minds.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:43 pm | Report abuse |
      • Everything in Moderation

        How far up the historical record did your education end?

        Because there's been some changes in thought…lot of it started with Descartes.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:50 pm | Report abuse |
      • Peter

        Descartes is a little late. Bibilcal principles have been followed for four millenia. Descartes started with nothing, reducing all to "I think..." and ended with a big nothing. Good example though, of following twisted minds. You could name many more such men? Yes?

        February 1, 2012 at 3:18 pm | Report abuse |
      • Kristen

        Actually, our country is built off of the enlightenment and John Locke. There were certainly Biblical principles, but that as also during a time when the bible was used to defend slavery. Oh, and women could not own property, as everything they had was covered by their husbands (Coverture).

        The history of our country is fascinating, complex, and wonderful. Yes, some is based on the bible, but to say that it was all based on the bible is incorrect. Thomas Jefferson stated that a Muslim could be president as they had built a secular government.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dex

      Moron's idea of a family...

      Oh wait, morons don't have ideas, they let their sadistic, arrogant, lying clergymen to do that for them.

      Is that what they mean by free will? That they are free from having one?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:05 pm | Report abuse |
  46. My2Sense

    Hold on, why exactly is a 7-year-old losing sleep over a state congressional vote?! There's no reason a child should be that concerned about politics. Parents, part of your job is determining the line between educating your children and placing heavy burdens on them (such as fear for their family's integrity).

    February 1, 2012 at 1:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      I am pretty sure these parents are allaying her fears, but a child ignorant of issues that directly affects their family is not sound parenting. This family has a different dynamic and the parents need to deal with that, not sweep it under the rug. Life is not pretty and it's not fair and there are bad people out there. We taught stranger danger to the kids from a very young age. Now as they approach their teens we reinforce it even more. You have to protect your children, not maintain some sense of ignorance, while they hear friends and family talking about it. They should be included.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:39 pm | Report abuse |
      • anonymous

        Well said!! 🙂

        February 1, 2012 at 2:16 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patricia

        Thank you anonymous. I believe in disclosing to children. They understand more than we give them credit for.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • Amy

      I think you missed the point. Children see and hear things around them and ask innocent questions. Of course they're not concerned about the fine details, but they'll probably ask their parents about things they notice makes them upset. To put this in perspective imagine a century ago the President would ultimately decide if inter-racial couples could legally marry or not I imagine kids from inter-racial families would be wondering why their black father/mother could not stay together because of segregation. Think about that.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • zz

      Different families have different things that they feel strongly about. If politics of gay marriage is what this particular family their children to be passionate about, they have the right to do that. You can choose your own ideas, they can too.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      Kids observe and pick things up. My daughter used to have nightmares at that age that the 'bad people' she saw on the news programs, and in the newspapers, were going to come and take her away from her mother and I. You can't keep them in a bubble.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      Seriously!? A 7 year-old is concerned that an ignorant society may force them aparat and all you get from that is that a 7 year-old shouldn't be concerned about politics!?

      I think I would put more faith in that 7 year-old to know what's right than most religious adults.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dan I.

      It's probably impossible to insulate the children completely from the news and they WILL notice that people seem to be arguing about families with "two mommies" or "two daddies" and whether that is "ok." Kids are pretty smart, they pick up on more than you think.

      But if you haven't been in the situation of having an organized, concerted effort to demonize your family and break it apart as much as legally possible you wouldn't know that.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jamie

      There are kids I'm sure that are better adjusted than you are because their parents didn't baby talk them and treat them like they were fragile. Kids are smart, if we treat them otherwise we get people like you who think that they know how all parents should raise their kids, and the cycle continues...

      February 1, 2012 at 2:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dex

      That's funny, conservatives don't let that stop them from pushing their religious crap on their kids.
      Weird huh?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        My daughter has a friend who has been so brainwashed by her parents that she actually fell to her knees in the middle of the street to pray aloud for my daughter. They are both 12 years old, and the kicker is.....my daughter is actually a christian who goes to church twice a week.... her crime apparently was to suggest that not everything in the bible needs to be taken literally and there are stories in there that are to be used as parables and guiding principles instead.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:11 pm | Report abuse |
  47. Mike Rowe

    Recipe for stupidity:
    (1) do something knowing full well that the laws aren't up to date and society isn't mature enough to deal with it
    (2) involve children
    (3) act shocked and persecuted when you're society treats you and your kids horribly
    (4) throw a pity party and plaster pictures of your kids all over the internet

    February 1, 2012 at 1:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • El Giblet

      It's a dirty job

      February 1, 2012 at 1:38 pm | Report abuse |
      • AudeSapere

        Perhaps even a job for a Ford truck man!

        February 1, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • Katy

      So, wait, am I to understand that people shouldn't stand up for what they believe in, they shouldn't fight for it, and we should just let society lie as it is?
      Besides, who determines whether society is really ready for something. It certainly isn't you.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Everything in Moderation

      Your recipe for stupidity is EXACTLY the behaviour that established the U.S.A.

      I'm not sure what your citizenship is, but if it's American…sad.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      At least you acknowledge that society is immature in this regard....something I would attribute to a society still being chained to ancient, obsolete beliefs which instill immature and childish thought processes that prevent true rational thinking from taking place.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • AudeSapere

      Yes, clearly, *that* is the problem here.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Edwin

      Mike Rowe:

      You seem to suggest that people should not live their lives the way they think is right and correct, because the law says they can't. If the law prohibited you from forming or going to a church, would you consider it stupid to do so?

      Or would you push to try to change what you knew to be an unjust law?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Loren

      I hope to heck that you are NOT the Mike Rowe who hosts "The Dirtiest Job" and schills Viva paper towels and Ford Trucks. I kinda like(d) that person. If you are indeed he, shame on you (in fact shame on you whether or not you are he). If you are not THE Mike Rowe, you are, essentially, defaming his character and putting words in his mouth. I hope you have a good lawyer, in that case!

      February 1, 2012 at 5:16 pm | Report abuse |
  48. Eli

    @veritas So...let us outlaw the death of fathers. Your loss is not everyone's loss, sad as it has been for you. A positive male role model can be, and commonly is, a grandfather, uncle, stepfather, or friend. One law to balance the marriage equation to include more common walks of life is needed to force employers and such to treat all relationships equally. The argument of "where will it stop" is idiotic and simple. Prejudice is ugly from all angles, especially from the religiously biased. Perhaps one day we can make you unlawful. LOL

    February 1, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Report abuse |
  49. iorhael

    Kudos to Kim...you stated it beautifully! As a Christian, I have gone through a complete turnaround on my position regarding gays and lesbians in recent years to come to where you are. You know, Jesus Himself threatened to destroy the "fabric of society" with his life-changing challenges to think and behave radically different, and to love your neighbor...and look what they did to Him 😦

    February 1, 2012 at 1:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      I am glad that you saw the light regarding the idea of acceptance, which is what I believe Jesus what preaching. I also like the last part where you raised the issue of Jesus being persecuted for being different. If only other christians would see that, and the logic in your realization.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:01 pm | Report abuse |
  50. Kaje Harper

    Thank you so much for standing up and speaking out. Teaching our kids acceptance, empathy and compassion will make the world a better place. We should all think about what our children are learning from our words and actions. Yours obviously know that love and family are what count; sad that others want to take that away from them.

    Facing exclusion and hate takes courage, and I applaud you for having the strength to stand up and be heard in such a public forum. Best wishes to you and your family.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:23 pm | Report abuse |
  51. bob

    Just let they gays get married so they can be bitter and depressed too. It is an awful thing, why get married at all it is like slavery. Make it illeagle for everyone!

    February 1, 2012 at 1:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • pazke

      Oh, Bob. Poor, sad Bob.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:31 pm | Report abuse |
  52. Curious Reader

    I am actually on the fence as to whether to accept gay/lesbian marriage. I am a Christian, but I feel the God understands all these issues and still loves us through them. But on the other hand, I have been brought up to believe that marriage is to be between a man and a woman. I just don't know what to believe right now. 😦
    Something I am curious about.. how did they have kids?

    February 1, 2012 at 1:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • Toxigal

      "Something I am curious about.. how did they have kids?"

      Really? Do you really need this explained to you?

      February 1, 2012 at 1:24 pm | Report abuse |
      • Curious Reader

        Sorry if I offended you or something, I have never been taught anything about this really.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rob

      Adoption, or a doner.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rebecca

      The artcile says how they had kids. They went thru invetrofertilization (spelling?) The process of getting a sperm donor and using their own eggs. Not an uncommon practice.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Proud To Be!!!

      Well, to put it plainly, Gay and Lesbian couples either have a friend who is willing to donate their sperm or you can purchae it from a sperm bank. The way of applying it, well, that is left to your imagination and behind closed doors, because even in the Hetro world, what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas!!!! LOL

      February 1, 2012 at 2:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • zz

      Tolerance is the key to a peaceful world. Religions have impede the progress of a peaceful world for decades, but I don't blame religion for that. I blame the humans who interpret religions inaccurately, and not use their common sense. There are enough problems on a global scale the we need to worry about: hunger, pollution, human trafficking etc. Celebrating a marriage (whatever gender(s) involved) is not a problem.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Edwin

      I am glad you are open about your confusion. I hope you do not take much ridicule for it. Ignorance is not a sin - but willful ignorance is.

      The article DID talk about how they conceived their kids, though it skirted the issue of parentage... are both women legally considered parents of both kids? That is one of the reasons gay and lesbian couples so urgently desire marriage rights - because if only one is classified as parent, then only one can legally make critical decisions for their child.

      Good luck with your decision. I certainly know which I think is right; I hope you are able to discover it, too.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:00 pm | Report abuse |
  53. Eric

    I laugh about the naysayers. Unless you are going to suggest going and KILLING every gay/lesbian person (in which case you are a sick, sick individual and probably should be put down yourself,) there will always be gays and lesbians. Let them have the same legal protections and rights as straight people.

    Society is not going to fall apart any faster than it is. Really the only thing it might hurt are some companies' bottom lines because they have to give better insurance rates or some other benefits to people they didn't have to before. And it won't be enough to collapse our economy. In fact, it could help because there will be more marriage license revenues, more weddings creating revue, and likely (unfortunately) more divorces giving attorneys even more money.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:18 pm | Report abuse |
  54. torqueflite

    Wonderful story showing the real lives of a gay couple. Gay people live, love, work, pay taxes and raise families like everyone else...but without many of the benefits. Warmest best wishes to Marci, her partner and the two children. My spouse of 35 years and I married in California in 2008 and count ourselves among the 18,000 couples fortunate enough to hold that distinction. To the good Christians spreading hate: you are the White Citizens Councils of our time. Americans will look upon you with the same shame and horror we currently do when reading or viewing accounts of the activities of segregationists of the Civil Rights Era.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      Thank you!

      February 1, 2012 at 1:41 pm | Report abuse |
  55. Shakti

    Wow, I am always so dismayed at the haters who post on topics like this. Do you have no concept that the people you're talking about are actually real PEOPLE, with real feelings, same as you, same as yours? I bet your comments would be very different in person, if you weren't hiding behind your keyboards. WAKE THE F*** UP!! Realize that these are REAL PEOPLE you're talking to and about, not just words on a screen.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:17 pm | Report abuse |
  56. ouch

    Curious as to which gender the daughters prefer. What happens if they just naturally prefer males?

    February 1, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      Then, gasp, they will date guys.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • Susan

      This is the dumbest question I've seen on this thread. What is wrong with you???

      February 1, 2012 at 1:15 pm | Report abuse |
      • QS

        This is the irrationality and ignorance that religion helps perpetuate on a daily basis. People who don't know any better and could actually learn something about our world instead decide to go to church.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:25 pm | Report abuse |
      • ouch

        Too bad you think it was dumb...I'm just trying to learn about people. I know nothing about gays or lesbians or their philosophies in raising children. Calm down..

        February 1, 2012 at 1:39 pm | Report abuse |
      • Everything in Moderation

        It isn't a dumb question. It's the question of somebody who has not been exposed to gay topics and is curious. Don't slam somebody for asking to be informed.

        Not knowing anything about LGTB lives is what causes a lot of people to make horrible assumptions in the first place. It's much much much better if the information is requested and provided. Then they won't be susceptible to the message of aliens and monsters coming from "leaders" who claim to know, but don't.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        I think the problem is Everything in Moderation is that the question itself seems to be almost as if the questioner believes that being gay changes someone to something other than human or gives them strange and foreign rituals or something. You get the impression that next the questioner will ask if gays speak english.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:03 pm | Report abuse |
      • Everything in Moderation (2)

        I've attempted to post three times to this thread. This is a test.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:15 pm | Report abuse |
      • Everything in Moderation (3)

        The key seems to be a name change. Or the CNN bot has a problem with child rearing comments.

        A person asking a question who is met with hostility may stop asking questions. If you assume they are your enemy to start, you might be wrong and you will have lost the opportunity to communicate on a sincere level.

        FYI ouch: This family (dare not use the L word), will raise daughters who may well be into boys (dare not use the H word). They are already aware of that, probably discussed it before ever starting the process. It happens a LOT of the time and works out just fine.

        Also: female couples often have boy children. Male couples raise girls. Because they have to deal with a lot of outside pressure, etc. They often are very careful and attentive parents who raise very well rounded children. There is often, purposely, a opposite gendered role model for the children within the family or social circle.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:23 pm | Report abuse |
  57. IMHO

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

    That is the foundational reason for the legitimacy of the United States. We exist to be a place on this world, more than all others, were people can receive the blessing of liberty, which includes the right to marry whomever they wish.

    THERE CAN BE NO MORE CONSERVATIVE VALUE THAN THAT.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Loren

      What a beautiful way to put it. You are quite right – there cannot be a more conservative value than that! I have never understood the vituperation with which some people respond to the idea of letting people marry whom they wish. How the heck does it affect anyone else? Sometimes I really wish that some (so-called) conservatives would just mind their own business and stop trying to mind other peoples. They – and we – would be a lot happier.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bregginkrak

      Perfectly said!

      February 1, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • J. Morales

      Well then, can a 50 year old man marry his 30 year old daughter? Anyone they wish right?

      February 1, 2012 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
      • TRH

        In some states and under certain conditions, yes.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • Loren

        Frankly, a parent marrying a child of theirs would squick me because of the inherent power differential in the relationship if he actually raised the daughter himself. I have no real major objection to sibling incest between ADULT siblings – the genetic objections have been shown to be overstated, at least in the first generation of offspring. Scientific research seems to support the idea that the incest taboo has at least some genetic component – that biological relatedness became a taboo due to evolution which may have, over many generations, tended to favor the offspring of non-related parents with a higher survival rate. Certainly, inbreeding over a number of generations increases the chances of genetic problems, but in the first generation, the chance of genetic problems is not demonstrably higher than between non-related parents.

        A father who did not raise his daughter, would relate to her on a more equitable level, that is, the balance of power in the relationship would be closer to roughly level, that in a situation where they have related to each other as parent/offspring previously. In such a case, where the biological parent raised the child, the issues of abuse and coercion must be considered. Like i said, in ANY situation where there is a serious inequity in the balance of power in a relationship, I have serious reservations. Whether it be parent/child, Grandparent/grandchild, uncle or aunt/niece or nephew, teacher/student, priest/congregant, guard/prisoner, boss/employee etc, etc, etc; any situation where one person has a considerable amount of power over the other is not one where I think an intimate relationship is largely appropriate, because of the potential for abuse.

        All that aside, if two people are in a relationship where they relate with roughly equal amounts of power between the two of them, then if they want to get married, who am I to decide that they shouldn't. Just because it might make me a little (or even a lot) uneasy, is no reason to deny a loving couple the right to marry. And I may be wrong, but I don't think that there are a lot of parents wanting to marry their children or vice versa out there.

        February 1, 2012 at 5:44 pm | Report abuse |
  58. gena

    This story is an illustration of how easily smiling faces and sentimental stories can lead us a way far from the truth. Sad.

    February 1, 2012 at 1:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • Deacon

      The truth of oppression and misogyny?

      February 1, 2012 at 1:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      Smiling faces and sentimental stories? So the sour faces and sentimental stories people see and hear when they go to church, those don't ever lead people astray, right? Eesh!

      February 1, 2012 at 1:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • Susan

      Your truth is a hateful lie.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kim

      It's seems that it's you who is 'sad'... what do you want to hear? That they are conjuring spells in their basement to secretly turn the world into evil, world-ending lesbian criminals? Jump into 2012; they sound like a wonderful, loving family – raising insightful, intelligent future adults! Clearly, as demonstarted by your comment, we need more of those.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:19 pm | Report abuse |
  59. Red

    I'm unsure what everyone is so afraid of...

    February 1, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      Nothing to be embarrassed about....even the ones who are the most afraid don't even know what they're really afraid of – they just know they're supposed to be afraid because their religion told them so.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:06 pm | Report abuse |
      • Red

        I'm talking to you too, QS...I don't see anything on this page from you that's constructive to the topic. Please enjoy writing more comments where you laugh at people who express any religious tone...

        February 1, 2012 at 1:13 pm | Report abuse |
      • QS

        Will do, thanks for your permission! :-p

        February 1, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
  60. Rob

    I agree with Thomas, and had a long post but I guess it takes allot to get your post on the board.
    Prior to the late 1800's the government was not involved in marriage.
    Judges should no longer be able to marry. Since the goverement's role would just be managing identified partners.
    Only churchs marry and if your church will marry LBGT, then its between you, God, and that church only!

    February 1, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patrick

      @Rob
      Marriage is older than your religion. Your church has no place telling me who I can or can’t marry.

      I'm striaght btw.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        You do not know that as fact. But whatever. Just like LBGT, if you want to get married in the church of what ever. That is between you and your partner. My point is that it is not the goverments roll.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      "Between you and god" – I really wish more religious people understood this statement when they make it because it should apply in any and all situations in life....everything that involves any version of god should be always and only be between that person and their version of god.

      In reality what they really mean is that it should be between you and "their god". This is why religion in general is dangerous to society as a whole – it divides more than it unites, it discriminates based on myth and conjecture and then insists that it is wholly benevolent and should never be questioned.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:15 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        You are wrong QS. I mean the God they worship. I believe in only one God so I assume anyone would answer to my God but that is not what I meant. So you really are just like the people you feel the destaine for in your post.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:32 pm | Report abuse |
      • QS

        "I believe in only one God so I assume anyone would answer to my God"

        And you prove my point, thanks!

        February 1, 2012 at 1:37 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        Really? I thought your point was that I was ingnorent and didn't know that there were people that had other religions and believe in other Gods or no God.
        My point was that they will answer to their creator, who ever that may be or no one at all. Their choice, not the goverments roll. That was the point. So you missed it as your focused on the words Chuch and God. Which seem to offend you. Sorry about that.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • Everything in Moderation

      The government got involved in marriage to keep women and children from being made a problem of the state when their husband/father tired of his role or found somebody new. The contract, between two people and the state, makes preparation for their death or divorce. It preserves the rights of spouses to certain things. It's a good thing for the rest of society and it's a good thing for non or lesser earning spouses and dependants.

      This licence is not really about church in the end, except that it is organized religion that is fighting it.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • DarkAges

      Unitarians perform ceremonies for gays and lesbians.
      Many of the most important 'founding fathers' were unitarians.
      If Jefferson, Franklin, Adams were alive today, they would surely conclude we are in the dark ages again.

      February 1, 2012 at 4:51 pm | Report abuse |
  61. bonus

    This is so disgusting and wrong....our society is certainly on a downward spiral

    February 1, 2012 at 1:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      LMAO!

      February 1, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • PolyPanSwitch

      blah, blah, blah.
      LOVE and JUSTICE are prevailing. You'll just have to get over it. :>

      February 1, 2012 at 1:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Trig

      I agree, I feel sorry for the kids and the abuse they will undoubtedly suffer through because of the choices their "mommies" made.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • Susan

        The only abuse they will suffer will be at the hands of the righteous bigots.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:19 pm | Report abuse |
      • M

        I suffered exactly zero abuse due to my dad being gay. I did, however, suffer abuse at the hands of straight "men".

        February 1, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
      • Loren

        Now, Sarah, come on. Post under your own name!

        February 1, 2012 at 1:45 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patricia

        "mommies?" Stop putting things in quotation marks as if they do not exist or are some fantasy. These are mothers- very strong, loving women who will teach their daughters to be strong, independent, righteous, compassionate, loving women,

        February 1, 2012 at 3:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • NC

      Have a heart people. Let them love whom ever they want to.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      "I agree, I feel sorry for the kids and the abuse they will undoubtedly suffer through because of the choices their "mommies" made."

      Trig – You are honestly going to sit here and blame the parents for any "abuse" these kids may endure because they have 2 moms, rather than place the accountability on those who rightfully earn it – the ones doing the abusing.

      The level of ignorance and irrationality from your statement forces me to assume you are religious.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • IMHO

      I agree, some of these anti-gay, hate filled comments are atrocious!

      February 1, 2012 at 7:08 pm | Report abuse |
  62. JC1

    More whinning.......

    February 1, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      More borderline illiteracy.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:20 pm | Report abuse |
  63. Thomas

    The word "marriage" should be restricted to religious organizations that want to recognize relationships as they define them. Federal and state governments should only license and give government sanction with all of the same governmental rights to "civil unions" whether the couple is staright or gay In other words, governments allow civil unions and provide the civil ceromony without discrimination. If the couple wants a "marriage certificate they can find a church that will do it. Freedom of religion and no government discrimination.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patrick

      @Thomas
      Marriage started out as a contract between two men. And had nothing o do with religion. LOOK IT UP.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dixie

      This is exactly how I feel things should be. It's the definition of the word that starts the controversy. Call any legal partnering a "civil union" and "marriage" should only be used in the religious settings.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Carol

      Although our marriage of 58 yrs. was held in our Lutheran Church, it is no reason for any Church to say they own the Marriage ceremony and the word Marriage. Marriage meant love, and having God bless our love. It means the same to this Lesbian couple, if Chrches can't follow the love of Christ and let people be who they are, than our government should step in and declare that all people are equal in America, including GLBT, and let's get on with living our lives with no more ridiculous arguments. You can't leave this important problem to states, they can't do it, just as though they couldn't take care of the rights of the black people. It's a shame on our country when a seven yr. old little daughter of this Lesbian couple has to ask if they will stilll be a family if this vote doesn't pass.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • finallysomesense

      i totally agree. people are aguing about the semantics involved with the phrase "gay marriage". i personally believe the term marriage is inherently religious and therefore it is not the government's place to reconize a marriage. the government's job is to ensure equal rights and protection, and recognize a union or a family as a unit. the decision to call a union a marriage ought to be up to each religion, and gay couples would simply need to choose a religion that accomodates their beliefs.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
      • Everything in Moderation

        " the decision to call a union a marriage ought to be up to each religion, and gay couples would simply need to choose a religion that accomodates their beliefs."

        And if they did find one, and they were wed in a sacred ceremony, they could then say they were married and OTHER church-goers would have to accept that, just like how Catholics have to accept that Protestants are married? There are gay positive churches, you know. So, what difference does it make where the "We're married!" affirmation comes from?
        Why bother fighting something that, by your idea, can just exist regardless?

        February 1, 2012 at 1:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • Caz in BOS

      The words "holy matrimony" should be restricted to religious organizations that want to recognize relationships as they define them. Federal and state governments should only license and give government sanction with all of the same governmental rights to "marriage" which pre-dates all religions.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Everything in Moderation

      At first, I didn't think the word marriage was important for gay unions, then I was exposed to the arguments from several people in different positions that this couple or that weren't "really" the same as that couple who were traditionally wed. It turns out that the word, held so precious by some, designates informally a level of rightness to the contract. Laws can say whatever they want, but if you don't have that marriage licence, there are places that won't recognize you and rights that will be denied you. So it is important to have an identical, rather than "separate but equal" union for all.

      But how sacred is that word—the WORD marriage? Is is used EXCLUSIVELY for a church blessed union? No. It's a hugely common word used for all kinds of things that have nothing to do with religion or sacred ceremonies or any of the things that gay lives would sully. It's a common word for combining things. If you can allow people to redo your livingroom with a marriage Art Deco and Classical design, you shouldn't have a problem with the two designers also being legally married.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • Loren

        I broadly and unequivocally support the rights of LGBT couples to marry and to have all the legal rights and responsibilities pertaining thereunto. But I DO think that it is the word "marriage" that really gets peoples' panties in a bunch. You would be surprised at the number of people I have talked to on this issue who REALLY believe that if "gay marriage" is legalized here in the US, then their church will be FORCED to hold weddings for gay people. I have talked recently to a priest (not mine, thankfully) who asked me "Why should I be forced to conduct a Nuptial Mass for a gay couple when the Church will never recognize the legitimacy of such a thing?" He flatly refused to believe me when I told him that that was not what the issue was about.

        The problem is, evidently, whether we want to recognize it or not, that for a great many people, the word 'marriage' IS a loaded word that means the union of a couple in a religiously recognized way and a great many people believe their churches would be forced by law to conduct marriage ceremonies for LGBT couples. Though I think such a belief is ludicrous on the face of it, a LOT of people seem to oppose the idea based on this reasoning. When I told the priest that gay couples were seeking the right to get a "marriage" license from the state and have the same rights under law as straight couples, NOT the right to force some church that didn't approve to conduct the ceremony, he refused to believe me! The word IS loaded with baggage. Maybe if gay organizations would speak out publicly to clarify this particular issue, it might help a little. I know, it beggers belief that they should have to, but never underestimate the stupidity of the populace. But given some of the comments I have seen here, Maybe it wouldn't help. You can't fix stupid...

        February 1, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • Everything in Moderation (3)

        Well, you're right about "can't fix stupid."

        Sill, what I would ask the priest is this:
        "You also do not believe that two Protestants can marry (or a Catholic and Protestant, or a divorced person, etc.). Are you forced as a Catholic priest to marry these people whom you do not believe can marry?"

        He is most definitely not. A member of his flock who, in his mind and by his faith, cannot be wed in the eyes of G_d cannot force him to marry them. He has the legal right to refuse.

        Now, where there is a problem is if he's acting as a chaplain (therefore outside of his church) or as a public official (say, Justice of the Peace at city hall) regardless of his personal beliefs, he cannot deny some people (be they Protestant, unbaptized, LGTB, atheist or Muslim) the licence and not others. That's the same for those divorced folk of his flock, though, too.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:37 pm | Report abuse |
  64. Thinking7

    CNN – Dedicated to the gay agenda. Proof is in the daily pro gay articles. CNN is disgusting. It is a brainwashing tool. The majority of Americans do not believe this is correct, yet CNN pushes the idea that everyone believes it is correct and these people are treated so unfairly. It is not normal to have "two mommies or two daddies." They do not reproduce and do not have the capability of teaching the children the role of a mom and a dad.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      They are doing an article because a vote that could affect them is taking place as soon as today so that makes sense.
      I dont think you are qualified to make the statement as to what the majority of Americans believe or not.
      And what exactly are the specific roles of a mom and dad that needs to be taught? I am willing to bet that there are several different answers that people would give to that question.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • Reagan80

        Absolutely. Don't let common sense deter you.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • mr. Magoooooooooo

      Wait, who's been brainwashed?

      February 1, 2012 at 12:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • Emily

      Could not have said it better my self!!!

      February 1, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • SFC

      thinking7..... I know straight people that shouldn't reproduce, and I also know you're referencing a perfect scenario for what I gather you feel is a Fathers responsibility and what is a mothers in raising the child. I am a Christian male, I do not agree with the lifestyle, and or the marriage of man to Man/woman to woman. I do however see caring people taking major responsiblity on raising children who otherwise would potentially grow up without either & unloved. Let God do the judging part, and maybe you could try the compassion & understanding part? just my opinion...

      February 1, 2012 at 1:05 pm | Report abuse |
      • Btru

        Bravo SFC. People may not agree, but being respectiful of others is paramount to the long term health of any society.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • Lonnie Wild

      anti gay = anti human
      you suck

      February 1, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Doug

      You're really quite amusing to get so worked up over what has zero effect on you or your way of life.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Susan

      Religion is disgusting. It is a brainwashing tool. The majority of Americans do believe this is correct, yet religion pushes the idea that everyone does not believe it is correct...

      February 1, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • M

      You do not speak for the majority of Americans, who at various points in time did not agree with interracial marriages or having a public water fountain utilized by both white and black Americans.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jason B

      Last I checked, there are plenty of "normal" man/woman couples that can't have kids either. Does that mean they shouldn't be able to get married?

      February 1, 2012 at 1:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • pazke

      Brainwashed? Oh, please. Maybe you are that impressionable, but I am not. I make informed, educated decisions and follow what's in my heart. I'm sorry you can't do the same.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • Peter

      You nailed it. Thank you.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • Lonnie Wild

        you name is gay

        February 1, 2012 at 1:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • Lonnie Wild

        soRRy, my R key acting up like a scared tiny minded biggot

        February 1, 2012 at 1:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Canadian

      I am a single mother to a ten-year-old girl and I have to be both "mom" and "dad" to my daughter. Would you care to explain to her why her family isn't a "real" family because she only has one mommy? Or would you consider our family "normal" because even though she just has a mommy at home, at least mommy isn't a lesbian? Unbelievable. I suspect that you're not really "Thinking" at all, are you?

      February 1, 2012 at 2:09 pm | Report abuse |
  65. John Miriam

    so domizers rock

    February 1, 2012 at 12:51 pm | Report abuse |
  66. Debbie

    God has blessed all four of you and the world with your presence. You're BEAUTIFUL!!!

    February 1, 2012 at 12:50 pm | Report abuse |
  67. Zena

    Your family is very different from mine. Mine is filled with hate and the lack of forgiveness.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
  68. Kim

    I am a Christian. I wholeheartedly believe in a God who loves us all so very much. I don't believe God sets anybody up to fail. I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God, and has tons of valuable information, but that so much of it is open to interpretation.

    I also believe that people are social creatures who use sometimes narrowminded beliefs to process the world around them. They form ingroups and outgroups. Social bonds are reinforced by not only accepting the views of others in the group, but also by ostrasizing those who are not. Difference isn't really tolerated very well, have you noticed? Bigotry is actually a social bias, based on nothing more than the need to identify with one group by condemning another. As with most social constructs, it is going to change with time and over generations. In 100 years we won't even be talking about this – there will be another hideous evil threatening to destroy the very fabric of society as we know it.

    God never changes. God will continue to love us all, regardless of whatever lines we draw in the sand to separate us from others who are different.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jason B

      You bring up a good point. But God didn't write the Bible...humans did. Often hundreds of years *after* the events the various bits talk about. And humans tend to be biased one way or another. Especially the Church and early Bible editors. (someone had to put the thing together) They'd have left in just the bits they agreed with, re-written other pieces, and cut out parts they didn't like. And now you've got those that take that book *way* too literally and refuse to think for themselves. "Well my religion & Bible tell me I can hate them cause my Bible tells me it's ok."

      February 1, 2012 at 1:39 pm | Report abuse |
  69. Sunnylovetts

    Christ is love. As long as you repent of your sins these two women will be welcomed in heaven like anyone else who repents.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      Ah sin – the ultimate religious method of control.

      Never fails to crack me up when religious people honestly think that simply because THEY believe something is a sin so must everybody else.

      Welcome to the real world where religion is actually what's unnatural as it requires normally logical, rational people to set those things aside in order to conform to a belief that dictates to them rather than asks them to think and question.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • NC

        @QS-
        Great post. Totally agree with you.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • Tim

        I don't disagree with your assessment of "religion" QS, but your statement also should apply to government. It should not be up to any state legislature alone to determine an issue of society and liberty such as marriage. If you really don't want to be dictated too, demand that issues like this be put to a vote of the people, not of politicians that can so clearly and easily be bought. The gay marriage issue belongs on the ballot during the 2012 elections. Presidential elections always carry a significantly better voter turnout than non-presidential cycles. Put it on the ballot and let the people decide what is best for the people. You mock the concept of religions dictating to people, then why be so willing to follow the herds of sheep into continuously allowing the government to do the same? Thank about it.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • Loren

        Tim, if we left such things to a "popular vote", we would still be living in a highly segregated society drinking from "white's (or coloreds) only" water fountains. Individual persons may be intelligent and capable of well reasoned and thought out decisions; the 'people' are stupid and too lazy to think for themselves; and cede that to religious or political zealots who pushing their own, often racist and bigoted, agendas. Our founding fathers knew this; it's why they created the electoral college system (which I for one hope is retained for a LONG time!). I know i'm paraphrasing someone here but i cannot remember who it is. Nevertheless, While I might trust some individuals to do the right thing, I would NEVER trust "the People" to.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • frespech

      If were all going to heaven then what is the lords prayer about in Matthew.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • mr. Magoooooooooo

      Only someone who lacks the ability to understand that "sin" is a lie, would believe in it... It's too bad that you believe you are inherently evil.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • Matthew7

      And what sins will YOU need to repent for? When each of stands to be judged by our maker, I can't imagine a God who would judge us more harshly for who we loved during our life than for who we hated or ignored.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        Thats true, they believe their god thinks that way, and those that loved will be forever burning in torment and those that condemned and hated will have everlasting joy and peace, strange huh?

        February 1, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
  70. David

    The family unit is overrated.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      Conformity is boring.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • KASUMU

      Spoken like someone who had a dysfunctional family or does not know love.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:35 pm | Report abuse |
  71. lhpogo

    Most of the people I've met who are against gay marriage have never even met a gay or lesbian person before. Their assumptions are based on sheer ignorance.

    Abandon your prejudices and stereotypes. You'll be a much happier person without them.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      There are no valid arguments against gay marriage – there are plenty of arguments obviously....just none that are valid as they are all based in religious belief, ignorance and a false sense of superiority on the part of those who think they understand being gay when they aren't even gay.

      A religious person telling me that I chose to be gay, that I wasn't born this way, is like me as an Atheist telling a religious person that even though I may know nothing about their religion I still know more about it than they do.

      It sounds ludicrous right? Sadly, to religious people, this approach somehow actually makes perfect sense to them – that they can claim to know something they can't possibly know....much like their claims about the existence of a god.

      Guess it's par for the religious course.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:55 pm | Report abuse |
  72. mr. Magoooooooooo

    It's good to see an argument so deeply rooted in sanity... I'll wager dollars to donuts that any woman who doesn't validate your presence at the bar is probably a lesbian, right?

    February 1, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • toxictown

      C'mon now, you don't think Anti Ho Mo is old enough to drink, do you?

      February 1, 2012 at 12:40 pm | Report abuse |
  73. Heather

    Personally, I think the economy could be boosted in one fell swoop by legalizing gay marriage. Think of the license fees, wedding halls, florists, caterers, bands, and on and on that would be generated. For the record, I am a fiscal conservative, and a Christian. Not all of us oppose gay marriage. I could care less, so long as you are not trying to shove your relationship down my throat. I don't want to see anyone groping at each other in public. Male/Male, Male/Female, Female/Female.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Peter

      Heather or Heathen? You're a materialist. Drop the fake "Christian" label. You wouldn't know a christian view if one fell in your lap.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • Heather

        Actually, I would. I believe in God, forgiveness and try my best not to denigrate others for their viewpoint.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • iorhael

        Peter, time to go back and review your Bible...especially the gospels and Jesus's teaching on what the definition of being a real Christian is....contrary to popular belief, including yours, being a Christian is *not* defined by having an anti-gay viewpoint. Its about God's grace and forgiveness, and loving others as a result of that grace, as Heather has clearly demonstrated and you have not. How do you sleep at night know how you are treating others on the web? Time to revisit your own Christian "label."

        February 1, 2012 at 1:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • t3chsupport

      Agreed! (and don't forget divorce lawyers!)

      February 1, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
      • Heather

        I forgot those. Greedy bloodsuckers

        February 1, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • offfwhite

      LGBTQ people have been marrying in civil ceremonies for years... it has always been totally legal for them to throw a party. This will have no impact on the wedding industry.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
      • Heather

        Actually, very few of the 50 states even allow or recognize civil ceremony. Those I know in the LGBT community want full rights and refuse to go the civil union route that may not offer all the legal protections. I still believe it would be a huge boon. Again, my opinion.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Report abuse |
  74. Education

    A wise professor once told me, "We make progress, one death at a time." The slippery slope arguments are terrible as are the religious ones. This couple sounds great, and it's none of our business. If the state wants to give all the same rights to civil unions as they do marriages then I am sure a lot of LGBT community would be happy with that. In any case good luck Washington!

    February 1, 2012 at 12:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jen

      Heard the same in law school often, re: supreme court justices.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • Peter

      Your "wise" professor was more likely a commie, undermining western civilization. Hardly a wise thing to do. Are you people stupid, or just part of the revolution? You know, they gave up "the violent over throw of all existing social orders", because they knew they'd get their asees kicked. But they didn't all just give up and go home. Has any of you reasonable thinkers ever asked "where have all the communists gone?". They now write your books, magazines, newspapers, and tv broadcasts. They also teach your children, if you're stupid enough to send them to them every schoolday. Who needs violence, when the subversive overthrow of all existing social orders is so effective? Do I have to say it? Marraige is an existing social order, and violent or subversive overthrow of it deserves a swift kick in the ase.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        @Peter
        Western civilization is based on personal freedom. If anyone here is a commie it be you sir.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:18 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        look out peter, the commies are hiding under your bed. Maybe that person that delivered the mail is a secret commie that is spying on you, better stock up on your ammo, they might come for you any day now, save yourself!

        February 1, 2012 at 1:28 pm | Report abuse |
  75. jj

    Non traditional things always meet resistance, and take time to overcome. This is no exception.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
  76. Rod

    I honestly don't understand how anyone who's gay or lesbian can support any of the major religions today or even be a part of it. I'm sorry, I really don't. I don't mean to offend and I really hope people can make a valid argument here (instead of calling me names), but the Christian bible can obviously be used to support this hate and discrimination we see today, why with the majority of people opposed to gay marriage do so based solely on their religious beliefs. Maybe you can say there's nothing in the Bible that supports such a view, but like I said, whatever it is, it can clearly be interpreted that way. Either way, this is a touching story and I hope we as a nation can soon get past yet another form of discrimination.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • pntherpaw86

      The problem is closed-minded people who preach hate and take the biblical stories literally as opposed to praying to God and asking for his guidance on how to interpret the Bible to fit your life and your problems. Trust me, not all Christians are as unforgiving and hate-filled as some that you see on these posts.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • jj

      I have absolutely no problem with Gay or Lesbian marriage...doesn't affect me...not my business.
      But I also understand that this concept is a major shift in normally accepted behavior in our society. Not everyone thinks alike...not everyone is ready to change. I would have thought that pushing for "civil unions" would be more acceptable to a wider range of people than an actual marriage would be. But if that's not your thinking, that's fine. Just realize there will be resistance, and sometimes fierce resistance, to new ways. Good luck.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rod

        I'm not sure I understand that argument. I'm an atheist and I didn't take a test to get "married" i.e. enjoy the rights and benefits from being recognized by the state to have a spouse. Marriage can either be seen as a purely religious arrangement and a civil union the contract that deals with the laws or we need to recognize marriage for what it truly is today: the contract itself. Whether you have a religious ceremony or not, my "Marriage Certificate" is what gives me those rights, so yes, ALL people should have access to that, regardless of whom they want to "marry" imo.
        @pntherpaw I don't believe people receive answers to prayers. What I do believe is there are good people who would either ignore a certain religious teaching or disagree with it. And there are good people who will let those same teachings influence their views because they feel like if they don't they're not properly meeting the expectations of their faith. My argument was, however, not aimed at the outsiders (straight people in this case) judging this couple, but the couple itself and their association with religion. A religion, clearly stated by them, that promotes an contrary view to their lifestyle and dedication to each other. Thanks for the replies.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • RLJ

        One person's rights should not depend on whether they are acceptable to another person as long as they don't violate anybody else's rights.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • JMo

      I agree. The Bible demands that gays be stoned to death. Why any gay (or other) person would adhere to a book that promotes such tripe is beyond me.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:46 pm | Report abuse |
  77. muchtoosilly

    Our society would be LUCKY to have more loving, legally recognized families – regardless of their composition.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ricardo

      God is more concerned with how we hate each other, than with how we love each other.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • MandoZink

      I feel lucky to know the loving "legally un-recognized" families I have met. Really good people. If these frightened folks ever meet them, maybe by pure accident, they will get the chance to be pleasantly surprised.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:46 pm | Report abuse |
  78. YM

    PEople say that I shouldn't be able to marry my partner because it is "not natural". I was previously married and have a daughter by that marriage. She was also previously married and has 2 kids. We were not happy in your "natural" setting. The biggest issue that I have not being able to be "Married" is the legal implications. FMLA does not apply to either of us if one or the other gets sick. We have no rights to be with the other in the hospitals or make decisions for the other that straight married couples have. I have to have papers drawn up at a lawyers giving her these rights, because as most married couples we have talked about these things and what we want in certain situations. I have incredible insurance but can't put them on it because we live in a state that doesn't recognize our marriage. She works but over 1/2 of her paycheck goes to crappy insurance. I just want to be able to live my life with my wife and kids and be able to take care of them like many others take care of their families. I don't want to marry my dog or anything stupid like that. Is it so much to ask to have the same chances to do right by my family? Whether you like my family or not does not matter. It is still my family and I deserve the right to take care of them with the same benefits as Straight families.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • pntherpaw86

      Well said, it simply amazes me that people are so filled with hatred and bigotry that they would be willing to advocate against allowing two people that love each other the ability to be together in times of sorrow and pain and suffering. Things like family medical leave are EXACTLY why the federal government needs to recognize unions between two loving persons regardless of gender.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:30 pm | Report abuse |
  79. Mean People Suck

    What would it be like if folks like you spent time helping the world to be a better place by building people up – instead of trying to tear them down?

    #meanpeoplesuque

    February 1, 2012 at 12:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • peggy

      Sign me on for the building up job please.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • The Bodacious

        Just signed you up. Get ready to rock and roll.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • Nice People Swallow

      Couldn't resist.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • poly

      Now that the US is on the verge of having a mor mon president. let Utah revert back to allowing poly gamy. Stop the intolerance and bigotry. Stop the hatred. poly gamists are people too. They can form loving families too.

      The 45th president will be a mor mon. In contrast, the 43rd president was a mor on.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:30 pm | Report abuse |
  80. Hello

    Come her often?

    February 1, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Report abuse |
  81. lildeekayjayaye

    I do believe in God. Therefore, I try not to judge. That is not my place. I think that what is in our hearts is what God will look at when we die.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • Miriam

      True Christian. Keep the faith.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:18 pm | Report abuse |
      • Miriam

        Or...true whatever-your-religion-may-be - I did not mean to make assumptions.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • jason

      And God doesn't make mistakes, so when a person is born gay, God made them that way.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:19 pm | Report abuse |
      • frespech

        BS.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • Das Pruessen Kasier

        You believe in a book?

        February 1, 2012 at 12:31 pm | Report abuse |
      • SFC

        judge not lest ye be judged, vengeance is mine sayith the Lord. Love your Lord God with all your heart & soul- Love your neighbor as you love yourself. First 2 commandments... I'm not grading your paper, but it is all Christian believers responsibility to preach the gospel, and in the Bible it speaks of God creating one man for one woman. There are many many problems in our world today. I wouldn't rank one higher than another, a sin is a sin is a sin, I'll continue to pray for the confused-misguided and the evil behind it. God bless you, and pray on every decision, everything, all the time....

        February 1, 2012 at 12:32 pm | Report abuse |
      • mat

        Nobody is born gay, stop consoling yourself with such words. It's a life style people have chosen and the society seems to want to accept it. Being Gay is no different from being a Thief. Both are lifestyle nobody is born a thief, just as nobody is born gay.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rod

        mat

        You should publish this breakthrough scientific study you seem privy to because it'll refute an ongoing, growing body of scientific knowledge that supports the idea that it's just not that simple. But let's say you're right and it IS a choice. SO WHAT? These people aren't causing you any harm (unlike thieves as you mentioned).
        We weren't born wearing clothes either. Wearing clothes is by no means natural (no other species seems to do it), but we do it anyway. Or drive cars. Or FLY (definitely not natural to us). Get a grip, man. You're showing your own insecurities to the world right now.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • jimm

        "Being gay is no different than being a thief." Wow, we have a real expert debater, ladies and gents. Being gay is a choice because.... you say so. We can ignore any experts or people that have studied the issue. Thanks for clearing the matter up.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        lol, sorry mat but people are born gay the same way people are born straight.. Using your logic it would be possible for you to choose to be gay, and feel comfortable doing so, and I doubt very much that is the case.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • peggy

      I am with you all the way.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:22 pm | Report abuse |
  82. Veritas

    I grew up fatherless – he died when I was an infant – my life was adversely effected and having no positive male influence still bothers me to this day many years later – for those who assume that those kids will grow up and have no issues I hope you're right for the kids sakes – but I doubt it.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      And there are those that grow up with a father that turn out ok, but I am curious as to what you think you missed that only your father could give you.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:16 pm | Report abuse |
      • peggy

        My niece was always sad because she never knew her natural mother. She always cried over that. One of my sisters got so tired of the tears, that she searched for my niece's mother and arranged for them to meet. Later, my niece asked her why did she (my sister) not ignore her tears. She said she would have been much better off not knowing her mother. Had she never met her mother, she would be still crying. There are two side to every coin. Work with and be grateful for what you have and from that which The Lord has spared you.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • Veritas

        Cedar Rapids – And there are those that grow up with a father that turn out ok, but I am curious as to what you think you missed that only your father could give you.

        Curious about what I think I missed – how about a whole life without a father's guidance – positive male role model – a million interactions that could have made a difference in my life – you are kidding, right Cedar Rapids?

        February 1, 2012 at 12:43 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        "you are kidding, right Cedar Rapids?"

        No, I am serious, what do you believe a 'male role model' gives you? Are they the only one that can teach how to 'treat a woman'? how men are supposed to behave? are women unable to teach that?

        February 1, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Report abuse |
      • Toxigal

        I know plenty of people who grew up with no father but still had multiple positive male role models in their life. I also know plenty of people who grew up with a father who did not fulfill this role.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • elppagar

      Have you watched the movie "Courageous"? Speaks to just such a problem.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • mr. Magoooooooooo

        HAHAHAHAHA...

        February 1, 2012 at 12:28 pm | Report abuse |
      • andrew.peter

        pearls before swine...

        February 1, 2012 at 1:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      One of the biggest problems with this debate is exactly what you are doing – simply because something affected YOU either negatively or positively in YOUR life does not in any way, shape or form mean that the exact same experience will be had by all who may happen to face the same type of situation in life.

      And your doubt about how other peoples' kids must inherently need to have a male or female figure in their lives in order to be "well-rounded", as it were, seems to stem from your own insecurity surrounding what you believe you missed out on in that regard.

      I'm sorry you didn't have a father growing up, but many people do in fact grow up in families where both parents are present and still turn out to be some of the worst people alive. There is no set path to follow when falling in love or raising a family, despite what the zealots and so-called "moral majority" would have everyone else believe.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
      • peggy

        You are insightful,helpful and correct.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Heather

      I am a single parent, my 12 year old son has never known his father as he walked out on us when I was 8.5 months pregnant. I have made sure to include some wonderful men in my son's life via friends, husbands of good friends, coaches and so on. A positive influence never has to be biological, it only has to be positive. As an adopted child, I learned that very early on. I was chosen by my parents to love. It is too bad that you feel deprived, I know my son doesn't.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • RLJ

      I am so sorry that you didn't get to know your father or he you.
      But do you suggest then that single mothers should not have the right to call themselves a family and have all the legal rights as a parent? Because that's what it amounts to for gay families when they don't have the same rights as the rest of us.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • t3chsupport

      Who's to say that your father would have been a positive influence? Plenty of kids grow up with dads, and they aren't all great. Most of them are mediocre at best, and you'd be really lucky to even have a mediocre one. They're still human, and nothing is the same as it looks on television. A man, woman, dog, and 2.5 kids does not necessarily make a happy home. On the flip side of this coin everyone is talking about, there are plenty of kids who with their father (or their mother) would just take a long walk off a short pier.

      Also, just because you don't have a father does not mean you don't get to have any positive male role models in your life. My dad left when I was 4, and I seldom saw him. I didn't have a 'positive male role' model in my life until I was about 14, at which point I had several positive male role models who were very active in my life and helped me be the person I am today. I don't call a single one of them 'dad', but they were all fatherly. If my mom was a lesbian, that would have been just fine, because having two loving parents is better than having just one loving parent, which is why the family unit is what it is – not because of what's between everyone's legs, but because it takes more than one person to raise a well adjusted child. Also would have saved us the horrors of all of our other perspective 'daddies' who liked to drink and do drugs and beat the holy hell out of my mom every night. But hey! At least their genitals were opposites, that's what counts...

      Yeah, I would have preferred she be a lesbian.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:28 pm | Report abuse |
  83. Miriam

    You are creepy. Get a life.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Report abuse |
  84. Bystander

    I have no problem with people loving each other and leaving together as family no matter what the composition is. Legal matters on the other hand is different story. Once you start tinkering with that – where do you stop? Why should it be defined as union between 2 consenting adults and not 3,4,5 or any? Why limit family to people only? Some people have ability to love animals, trees, buildings, etc. You better be prepared for all those unconventional families to want recognition and legalization.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • kdw31

      I wasn't aware that trees, animals and buildings could enter into contracts. When exactly did that happen?

      February 1, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Report abuse |
      • Jose

        The supreme court ruled they are people. They can now enter contracts and contribute unlimited funds to right wing conservative candidates.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • jason

      Umm, because marriage is between to of-age consenting human adults. Where do you get people will be able to marry their pets, don't be silly.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • jason

        two^ not to...

        February 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Josei

      (Bystander) You use the same tired, lame & illogical argument that scared, non thinking Christians use, "Why stop at people?"
      Is it because maybe you want to marry 2 or 3 or 4 people? Or maybe you want to marry your neighbors dog?

      You are just jealous because they a happy and you are not.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:24 pm | Report abuse |
      • frespech

        How about a 24 year old couple, brother and sister who want to marry?

        February 1, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • Jose

        I have no idea why you would want to marry more than one woman.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • Bystander

        Calling names is not the same as making arguments.

        February 1, 2012 at 10:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ricardo

      Dogs and cats, living together, Mass Hysteria!

      February 1, 2012 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      K, hang on....you have no problem with people living together as a family no matter the composition – except that they deserve, as a family, the same legal rights and protections as any other family.

      So really, despite your claims to the contrary, you DO have a problem with it.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • I agree...

      Look what happened when they decided that a king shouldn't be the only person to make decisions about society. They gave a voice to nobles THEN the extended it to rich landed white guys THEN they decided all white guys should vote THEN they decided that non-white guys should vote THEN they decided women should vote.

      You know that they are just waiting to give the right to vote to trees, animals, and buildings.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • Russel

      That's possibly the worst argument ever.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • MashaSobaka

      Were these "slippery slope" arguments concocted on a playground? Seriously! There is no logical connection between "gays can get married" to "we can now marry a dog" (uh, hello? Do dogs have legal standing? Can they sign a marriage contract? A marriage license?) or "polygamy is legal once again" (how in the heck do you go from two people getting married to one man ruling over fifteen wives? Please explain that logic, if you even can!!). I've heard some people say that if we open the door to gay marriage then we won't be able to stop child marriage. Are you people freaking kidding me?! Put the juice box down and go educate yourselves!

      February 1, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Report abuse |
  85. elppagar

    They have the same rights under the law as do all people in America. The same laws apply to everyone equally. Laws often have restrictions. Behaviors are not civil rights. Stretching every day is not a civil right, nor is going to the gym, walking, going to the bathroom, etc. The s exual behavior of hom ose xuals is not a civil right. It is a behavior and the ho mose xuals are hiding under "civil rights" in order to change the meaning of marriage and force society into accepting it as normal.
    To marry the same s ex is to request special treatment by having special laws passed that socially and politically approve of a particular se xual behavior and redefine what marriage is.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • BFD

      Then there should be no question of the GOVERNMENT making any legislation on marriage on any terms. It means that the GOVERNMENT cannot determine what a marriage is or isn't. It means that the GOVERNMENT has no right to define marriage. If you're so worried that YOUR MARRIAGE is in jeopardy because of other people then YOU need to re-evaluate your own marriage. Because it has nothing to do with other people.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • Josei

        (BFD) Nice one

        February 1, 2012 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      So being hetero is a behaviour as well then?

      February 1, 2012 at 12:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • pntherpaw86

      elppagar, the straight se x you are having isn't a civil right either then, so please stop doing it right away!

      February 1, 2012 at 12:20 pm | Report abuse |
      • Jose

        Actually, it is.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • jason

      Marriage is between two 18+ year old humans. If it was solely about religion, atheists couldn't get married and you wouldn't be able to marry through a court instead of a church. Your logic is flawed.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:23 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rob

        Why would an athiest need a judge to marry. I am sure with goverement out of the picture. There would be many secular businesses that would perform what they call a marriage and have a whole package of events to choose from

        February 1, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Josei

      (elppagar) So,you are saying God makes mistakes? I was always taught that God is perfect. This is not the case?
      Wow! You have insight that the rest of us are lacking. Please continue so we imperfect souls may be enlightened.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • mr. Magoooooooooo

      Why is that people who share your take on marriage ALWAYS use the most extreme correlations that have NO basis in reality?

      February 1, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Report abuse |
  86. pittsilvania pete

    "Marriage", the word itself grew out of ancient religious concepts.
    The Gays need to avoid it altogether and create their own tradition and avoid that word altogether.
    Were you to say, "I take you as my Schmizmar", then no one would object.
    How could they, you made the idea, you own it, heck, copyright your own word.
    Invent a tradition, copyright it, and get it legal status.

    February 1, 2012 at 12:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • skpfrmdc

      Absolutely! the word "Marriage" is a buzz word for people that disagree with gay unions of any kind. Remove it from the equation and face less resistance.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • pntherpaw86

      Ok, fine, we'll stop trying to use the word "Marriage" when the government stops using it to recognize unions between two persons. At the federal and state level, two consenting adults should be able to get a civil union, man with woman, man with man, or woman with woman, that is exactly the same as what the federal and state government refers to as "Marriage" today. Then if you want to get "Married" in addition to your civil union, go to a church that recognizes your union and do so. But keep religion out of government recognition of the union of two people.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • jason

      I suppose we should make it illegal for atheists to get married then, right?

      February 1, 2012 at 12:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • toxictown

      That would work except there are all kinds of legal functions that hinge on the term "married" or "not married". If we can change that well, then, yes.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:43 pm | Report abuse |
  87. Tracy Rowan

    Oh... just ignore the haters, the irrational, the stupid, and know that family is all. It doesn't matter who your family is, just hold on to it and love it because it's all we ever really have in this world. You sound to me like you're doing a great job and I support you 100%.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:54 am | Report abuse |
    • SoundOff

      Our reasoning has become ill because we have not heeded our Creator's advise. Romans 1:18-32 May you read it and be enlighten lest you keep being an ignorant.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Report abuse |
      • BFD

        Ignorance is following the teachings of only one book.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:11 pm | Report abuse |
      • Miriam

        So do you eat cheeseburgers? Because God said you shouldn't. HERETIC!

        February 1, 2012 at 12:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • mr. Magoooooooooo

        "Keep being an ignorant", good one. Really though, someone who subscribes to the teachings of an archaic way of life not able to adapt to the modern world and change has NO place to describe anyone else as someone who is ignorant.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • toxictown

        Why anyone would use a book of the heat-stroke inspired mad blatherings of a bunch of wine-soaked, iron-age desert dwellers as a blueprint for living in 2012 is beyond me.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • mikeM

      And the daughters of this couple occurred by divine intervention?
      To compare gays-rights to civil rights is an insult to minorities.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • jk105

        Excluding gays from legal remedies against discrimination is an insult to civil rights... and to minorities, of which none have a monopoly on being oppressed.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • frespech

        BFD. It may be compiled in one book but it is actually 66 manuscripts written by over 40 authors over a period of some 1500 years.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:39 pm | Report abuse |
      • pntherpaw86

        Last time I checked, the definition of "minority" is any group having a differentiation based on one or more human observable characteristics (hint: gay people count as a minority). Oh, did you mean that gay people are offensive to african americans??? Hmmmmmm, wonder why that would be??? Oh, I know, because the vast majority of african americans are deeply religious, causing an irrational hatred of gay people!

        February 1, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Report abuse |
  88. Paul

    Congratulations to you and your family. You sound very much like my daughter and her family. They've been together for about 5 or 6 years and have a 6 mo. old daughter. On the legal issue I strongly feel that your marriage should be legal. In a government that claims to have separation of church and state a marriage is a legal contract between 2 consenting adults. Whether or not certain religions will accept those marriages is not the states concern and should not be decided upon by consulting religious doctrines. The other end of the discussion is that you will also get the possibility of experiencing the pain and expense of divorce court just like the rest of us. Be careful what you ask for.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:54 am | Report abuse |
    • Maggie B

      Your point about divorce is a good one – but it's not something that you should be careful about what you wish for. Divorce is one of the benefits of marriage that is currently a right not extended to gay couples whose marriage is not recognized in their state. Divorce is a benefit that helps two people separate their lives in a relatively orderly manner. Unfortunately, if you've been married in a state that recognized gay marriage and them moved to a state that doesn't, you have no right to get divorced! It's just like adding insult to injury.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:05 pm | Report abuse |
  89. Lee

    I think the article was an excellent one! I'm proud of my fellow Washingtonians for finally coming around to the idea that equality means equal, not separate and kinda equal!

    To Ladybird, I would ask how you would prevent your seven year old child from knowing about the political and social struggles going on. If your child attends school, if they have access to TV or newspapers, how could she NOT know? The point is not to shelter children from what's going on in the world that directly impacts them, but to explain it to them in a way that they can comprehend. I say this as a parent of three now grown children.

    And to Wildblue I would simply say that marriage is whatever we say it is. Marriage is, after all, a civil contract, licensed and regulated by the sate, and marriage imparts upon those in such a contract a number of important legal and financial benefits. That's why people want equality of rights in marriage. Because without it, they're not able to access those same protections and benefits. Marriage is NOT about conception, sir. If it were, infertile couples and couples that did not want to have children would be barred from marriage. I think you should take a moment to rethink your argument.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:53 am | Report abuse |
  90. HAG

    Magoooooooooo The Bible also tells you to lill people. So being a Bible person how mant people have you killed.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:51 am | Report abuse |
    • mr. Magoooooooooo

      Wow... It's amazing to see how many people totally missed my point... HAHA
      Where did I say anything about ME believing in the bible? The bible is fantasy. Is that clear enough for you.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:58 am | Report abuse |
    • Bible Clown

      "So being a Bible person how mant people have you killed." If I told you, I'd have to kill you.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:06 pm | Report abuse |
  91. MandoZink

    I have known several gay couples who raised children. The children turned out just wonderful. Funny thing though, they also turned out completely straight! They also had LESS issues to confront because they inherently understood the error of the arguments people think they have. It appears the parent's love and dedication to the children actually gives the children a BETTER view of the human spirit. Confusion? Heck no! Those kids get it! Look at Rene Russo. Raised by lesbians, now married for 20 years with one child. She adores her loving parents and considers her upbringing to be a blessing.

    Once you see how these things really are and realize the fallacies of prejudices you inherit, you become a lot more aware and open. It makes it easier to quickly recognize the good people possess, as opposed to only seeing the superficial. I feel lucky that my life allowed me to stumble upon these things. I have truly wonderful friends, both gay and straight.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:50 am | Report abuse |
    • sadie 456

      Very well said! One of the few comments on this contentious issue that overflows with sense and compassion. Bless you.

      February 1, 2012 at 4:49 pm | Report abuse |
  92. Scatcat

    Why stop with 2 women? Why not 3 women married who all love each other? Why not 3 women and 2 men? 2 men and 8 women? It's so much easier to just keep it at 1 man and 1 woman. Period. Most people don't approve of Polygamy or Polyandry, marrying minors, etc. Why draw the line outside 1 man and 1 woman? Seems we go down a slippery slope to lots of situations when we start moving the boundary.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:43 am | Report abuse |
    • t3chsupport

      Slippery slopes are the arguments of morons who don't have anything of substance to offer.

      2 consenting adults. That's all a man and a woman getting married are. Why do you care so much about what's between their legs?

      February 1, 2012 at 11:50 am | Report abuse |
    • SPLAT!~

      As long as it's between consenting adults, why is it your business? Most people don't believe in having 19 children, but it still happens.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:50 am | Report abuse |
    • xab

      Two non-related adults.

      What's so hard with that?

      I didn't even add in the word "committed" so people like Gingrich can still get married.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:51 am | Report abuse |
      • NiEM

        ooo zing!

        February 1, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • Bam!

        indeed!!!

        So, we have people who talk about "destroying family values", and still vote for Newt Gingrich?

        Sad. Really.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:22 pm | Report abuse |
      • frespech

        Who are you to suggest that 2 related adults can't marry?

        February 1, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • MandoZink

      Why not just 2 people in love?

      February 1, 2012 at 11:52 am | Report abuse |
    • food for though

      ahhh the old slippery slope argument...classic.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:53 am | Report abuse |
    • CR

      Scatcat that sounds like an awesome idea. Let's let people make their own minds on how they want to live their lives. Thanks for the suggestion! Although your "minor" comment may have crossed the line.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:55 am | Report abuse |
    • elppagar

      That's is exactly why so many of us feel it is a threat. Not due to fear but due to fighting against abhorrent behavior to be called the "norm". It is simply wrong.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:55 am | Report abuse |
      • SPLAT!~

        Who gets to define what 'abhorrent' behavior is?

        February 1, 2012 at 11:59 am | Report abuse |
      • jk105

        The abhorant behavior is the bigotry, the bias, the discrimination–not the love.

        February 1, 2012 at 11:59 am | Report abuse |
      • mr. Magoooooooooo

        Please give a list of factual information to defend you "abhorrent behavior" stance. Until you can, your point is merely one of moral grandstanding.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • RKen

      Yeah, that same irrational fear and hatred with no substantial argument behind it has been present all through history, and one day people who expressed the same disdain towards gay/lesbians will be looked at just as poorly as the racists of the 18/1900s. You’ll be the bigoted grandparents of the future generations that bring shame and disgrace to the family.

      Feel proud of yourself.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Oakspar

      There relationship is not two women and two daughters. It is two women, two daughters, and at least one man. Pretending that there is not a man in their relationship because they did not know him, see him, or the levels of tupperware inbetween their acts of intercourse does not remove the man. Covering your head in the sand and pretending you can't see them does not make it so.

      True, this family will not tear society apart, and two women can rasie two daughters sucessfully (and have been, as widows, since the dawn of time).

      The question of tearing society apart, however, does not come from who you are or what you do – you are not that important. The tearing of society comes from the ideas you teach and spread:

      (1) that a man is not a part of a family who is necessary for the proper development of both genders of children and that it is a tragedy of loss when there is not a man in the picture of the family

      (2) that feelings, even love, can be the basis of morality that overrides established societal or religious systems of right and wrong – creating a subjective morality that can be bent to justify what you "feel" is right

      (3) that government has ANY role in defining a religious commitment on any (one you were willing to admit subverting and reclaiming for your religious community that acepts your definition of marriage – but then backtrack by desiring the government to legitimize what you already claim you don't need them to legitimize)

      (4) the slippery slop argument, already voiced by so many others here

      February 1, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • Bible Clown

        "(4) the slippery slop argument, already voiced by so many others here" Is that slippery slop called santorum? I heard it was.

        February 1, 2012 at 1:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cedar Rapids

      I love the people that like to say allowing gays to marry is opening the flood gates but refuse to see that surely allowing any form of marriage actually started the whole ball rolling. I tell you, if they didnt allow men and women to marry then you wouldnt be having these gays wanting to marry. Mark my words, if they continue to allow men and women to marry then it will end up with people wanting to marry trees...and other blah blah nonsense.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bible Clown

      I have three friends who consider themselves married. They don't give a crap what you think.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:05 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patricia

        I also know of a marriage between three (no children) and I have to say they each give 100% to the business they run, and the relationship. They have been in this relationship for 40 years now and I doubt they care what anyone thinks.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:15 pm | Report abuse |
  93. CNN Reader

    To this reader it is very telling how the columnist writes repeatedly about *my* love, *my* relationship, *my* family, this is the sign of a narcissist. Which is what we have devolved into, a society of narcissists.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:42 am | Report abuse |
    • xab

      Just replace "me" and "my" with "this author" and "this author's" and you should be happy.

      Talk about glossing over the real issues.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:46 am | Report abuse |
    • t3chsupport

      Yes, heaven forbid anyone write in the first person perspective! The fabric of society is ruined!

      February 1, 2012 at 11:51 am | Report abuse |
      • Bam!

        indeed! The fabric of the Universe will rip asunder if someone were to write a thoughtful and open-minded OPINION on the

        OPINION

        Page. I'll pack the gold, silver, guns, beans, and bottled water. Meet me at the shelter.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Lisa

      Would you prefer that she write about you? Your love? Your relationships? Why on earth would that make any sense?

      February 1, 2012 at 11:54 am | Report abuse |
    • jk105

      Being in a commited, loving relationship in which a child is being raised is your definition of narcissism? Get a dictionary.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:56 am | Report abuse |
    • cmsvmom

      How does loving someone else promote narcissism? I am a straight woman who was married for 15 years to a gay man who lied. He never referred to "my family" "my love" etc. It was always the REGAL WE. Oh but I was "my wife" to him. According to him I had no opinion that was any different from his, because "we" think this way. Oh yes we do....

      When I divorced him he spent 4 years and tens of thousands of dollars on legal fees to prevent joint legal custody and have the kids live with him, even though he had no idea how to care for them without getting a replacement model to do so. The idea was that he would "let" me take care of them. The problem was that in counseling I had spoken of his relationship with another man that he wanted to pretend did not exist and how that would affect OUR family going forward. So I was no longer a loyal subject and had to be exiled. The courts did not agree. It was such a shock to him that "intelligent people" could not see it his way, which was the right way, of course....and still he referred to himself as "we"...and then told others, including our children, that I was "no longer part of HIS family...."

      You were saying, about narcissism???? What was your question again???? About someone who talks about her love and her family? Must have missed the point....

      February 1, 2012 at 12:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bible Clown

      "CNN Reader
      To this reader it is very telling how the columnist writes repeatedly about *my* love, *my* relationship, *my* family, this is the sign of a narcissist. Which is what we have devolved into, a society of narcissists."
      Self-centered much? She was writing about her family. Did you expect her to call it "that family" or "those people?" What do you call your family? Oh wait, you're single. How did I guess. I'm psychic.

      February 1, 2012 at 1:15 pm | Report abuse |
  94. cleveland strong

    As a conservative, I don't understand why my fellow conservatives are against gay marriage. It's simple evolution. Now that their kind is out and coupled, they won't hide within the rest of the normal population. Over time whatever mutation or set of genes that causes the, lets call it, unproductive behavior, on an evolutionary level, over time, will exit the population. Once the Gays have literally bred themselves out of our world, they cease to be a concern. Born this way? Sure, but with decreasing numbers, and less voting power, over generations. So let them live free. Pity them, don't hate them. Let them have what they want for the little time they have left.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:42 am | Report abuse |
    • xab

      You failed Biology 101, didn't you?

      Most gay people have straight parents. Think about that for a minute. If it's too hard to comprehend, I recommend you stick with Fox News.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:44 am | Report abuse |
      • cleveland strong

        Gay "born this way" physiology continues to exist only when people with those tendencies breed with the general population. Up until the last generation, most gay people would pass for straight, take spouses, and pass those markers on. No longer. Take the time to look up some of the bonobo chimp studies you can find onliine.

        February 1, 2012 at 11:48 am | Report abuse |
      • MandoZink

        To Cleveland Strong. That is pretty revealing. I would guess other bigoted people would hope the genes for dark skin would be eliminated from the gene pool based on their prejudices. And how about slanted eyes? Ooooh, how about the genetic tendency for some evil diseases?

        I guess my preference would be to eliminate the genetic tendency to embrace prejudices. We would all be better off. You just have know idea how many of the wonderful people you know are gay. They would surely hide it from you, until you woke up.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • MandoZink

        Make that "no idea", not "know idea". Sorry. Bad spellling gene.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:16 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ricardo

        As a gay man, I can say I do fear this. I forced myself to make 2 children with a female I did not love entirely out of my duty to keep the Gay community alive and well. But most don't share my sense of duty to the movement.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:23 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cedar Rapids

        ok, that you actually think that cleveland is simply the funniest thing I have read here so far. gays will non-breed themselves out of existance huh? I will remember to tell my lesbian friend that her parents must secretly be gay and that her straight sister must also be secretly gay because only gays have gay kids.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • nunya

        @ xab:

        I'm assuming you've never heard of the Theory of Evolution, have you? I'd recommend you stick to 'Biology 101', since the 'advanced' topics are a bit beyond you. Cleveland Strong is correct in his analysis. These are genetic traits that have been suppressed and passed along due to societal pressures... These pressures are simply being released now and will have a tendency over time to filter these Inferior Traits (as described by Darwin's 'advanced' Theory of Evolution).

        February 1, 2012 at 2:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sandbox

      Your right let the gays and lesbians take themselves out of the Gene pool.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:49 am | Report abuse |
    • Anna

      Yeah, because all the gays have been pretty much bred out since they were recorded in ancient Assyrian text, right? That's nonsensical. Gay people continue to exist and will. They represent just another variation in nature that can occur randomly in a population, heredity aside. They will always exist.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ricardo

        Through history gay people have had to hide. They have been forced to pretend to be straight, marry, make babies with people they don't completely love.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • Les

      Marriage has nothing to do with the gene pool. It is entirely a social issue. It is normal for people in love to want to share their lives together. Those that oppose such unions are clearly deranged individuals and should be dealt with accordingly. Social customs have nothing to do with right or wrong. And the views of Xtians and nut jobs have no place in the creation of laws. While I am married to a wonderful lady, we both support laws that are designed to eliminate gender bias. A person does not "choose" who they fall ion love with.It's a chemical process in the brain. To think otherwise is ludicrous because people have no control over the chemistry of the brain..

      February 1, 2012 at 12:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rod

      Here's me hoping YOU don't procreate. Cheers.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:37 pm | Report abuse |
      • mr. Magoooooooooo

        Here's me hoping YOU don't post again. Jeers.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rod

        uh... why? I agree with you. I was replying to Cleveland Strong.

        February 1, 2012 at 5:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • mr. Magoooooooooo

        Sorry about that...on my computer it looked like you were responding to Les. My mistake.

        February 1, 2012 at 9:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bible Clown

      Sorry, Cleve; about ten percent of Mankind has always been gay, and always will be. If that gene were eliminated, Man would be changed into something else. It goes back to the cavemen and is going on into the future. Not likely there will ever be a larger percent either. Let's assume you are gay(you're welcome) and that you don't breed. Your brother and sister share your genes, and pass them on down anyway when they breed. Or your cousins, or second cousins.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • QS

      Actually what's dying out isn't gay people and won't be....it's conservatism and all the selfishness-inducing characteristics that go along with it.

      February 1, 2012 at 3:28 pm | Report abuse |
  95. Kim G

    So beautifully said! I hope that Washington will legalize marriage for you. I live in Mass and have witnessed friends that have been blessed by finally being able to marry after years of being together. To me, allowing a couple to marry can only support families.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:40 am | Report abuse |
  96. Beth

    What a beautiful family. It is embarrassing to be part of a country that is still so backward with regard to gay rights. It was in my lifetime that laws preventing people of 'different race' from marrying were abolished (these laws were still around in the 60s). Hopefully the unequal treatment of gays will end and in the near future no one will think twice about this anymore than they do of 'interracial' marriage.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:37 am | Report abuse |
    • Sandbox

      well here is the problem...........If your religous or any type, Buddist, Christian, Hindu, practice Islam, or Jewish then being gay and a lesbian is wrong. Since most of the world follows one of these faith paths, it will continue to be wrong in the eyes of the majority. If you do not believe in God then your home free. you can do what ever you want and have no consequences. So, there you have it.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:47 am | Report abuse |
      • Suzette

        Two things here: 1) the author of the article definitely believes in God. How many times was God invoked in the article? 2) I am an atheist. I don't believe in a mythical being the sky to keep me from doing bad down here on earth. I have my own inner moral compass, not enforced by scary stories, but enforced by my care and love for my fellow humans. I dare you to examine my life, my deeds and talk about how I behave like I have no consequences.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Report abuse |
      • Primewonk

        The word ho.mose.xual wasn't even coined until the mid 1800's. The original words in your bible do not accurately translate to what you fundiots claim. Plus, they referred to practices of pagan temple worship. The ones about men not laying with men as they do with women is talking about how inferior your god sees women. Sorrt.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
  97. KatherineV

    Mr. Magoooooo, Thank you very much for the points you are making!! I completely agree with you. Wildbluyonder11 is ignorant. We all must remember that ignorance is the most violent element in society.

    February 1, 2012 at 11:29 am | Report abuse |
    • mr. Magoooooooooo

      Your welcome, milady. haha Sad to see how many people misconstrued what I said.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:03 pm | Report abuse |
  98. Ladybird

    My only issue with this story is that a 7 year old has been exposed by her parents to the political turmoil surrounding her parent's relationship. Why on earth -at that age- make your child worry about something she has no control over? Would you intentionally expose your 7 year old to ALL the other horrors that can/do happen in the world? Better to shelter them for a little while longer when they can process the information. My neighbors, a gay man and his partner, have a son and they trot him out at every gay activist meeting they attend, as if to say, "Look! We're a normal family!". The poor boy has not benefited from being thrust in the spotlight...I love that child but he is deeply confused. He calls girls "females" as if we are something alien...

    February 1, 2012 at 11:19 am | Report abuse |
    • xab

      How do you know whether this poor boy has "benefited" or not? Are you licensed to make these sorts of judgment calls? Why should any parent shelter their children from the hatred or bigotry present in their country? You are advocating a separate but equal mentality and it's shameful and dangerous.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:38 am | Report abuse |
      • klur

        It is our job as parents to shelter our children until they are equipped emotionally to deal with it. A 6 year old child is not equipped to understand why someone hates their parents just for being gay.

        February 1, 2012 at 11:49 am | Report abuse |
      • rj

        It's not shameful and dangerous. It's no different than teaching your kids about not talking to strangers. You teach them to be safe, but you don't tell them details about all the monsters in the world and the horrible things they do to children, because there's no reason to terrify a child that young. Same thing here. Obviously even if the law doesn't pass, this family's living situation will not change – one of these mothers will not have to move out of the home. But in a 7 year-old's mind, that may be exactly what she's thinking, and that's not something a child should be worrying about.

        February 1, 2012 at 11:58 am | Report abuse |
      • peggy

        Xab,

        You are so correct. You cannot shield children from this and other issues as they always seem to know when something is not alright. Everyone should be allowed to enjoy freedom and that includes freedom of whom to love. I believe some of the anger is about money. If a gay/lesbian worked for their lifetime while being single, they pay taxes at the single rate and are excluded from spousal and other benefits. If they have no children, it is even better. Let it be.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:13 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ladybird

        Not benefited? Because he spends alot of time in my home playing with my son. I'm the only neighbor who will let this boy come over, as if his father's gayness could rub off on their children. So sad and he talks about it. One of his dads makes him carry a pink folder to school to "challenge" steroetypes- and he gets picked on for that. His dad should fight his own fight, not use his son to do it for him. Six and seven year olds go to school but they do not typically read newspaper articles about impending legislation and watch political news. They don't have playground discussions about politics. The parents should keep what they tell their children simple until they're older so they don't have to feel their family is threatened. It looks like these parents are grandstanding their kids for sympathy so readers will say, "Oh poor babies, worried about not having a family!" and that is what I take away from this story. Not whether gay is right or wrong.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • cleveland strong

      You are right LadyBird. My parents deeply exposed me to their adult problems at a very young age. It has left me a very cold, disconnected, emotionless person, I admit that. Let the children be children, they are not emotional pawns in adult arguments.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:45 am | Report abuse |
    • mr. Magoooooooooo

      Do you have children? Kids can understand and absorb and YES even process complex subjects if you are open, patient and honest.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • Miriam

      Really, you can't keep everything from your kids unless you homeschool and they never watch TV or use the computer.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • MashaSobaka

      I am so sick of these "Someone think of the children!" arguments. I would much prefer that children be taught that there is a ton at stake in everything we do, that life is not a basket of roses and adorable puppies, that there is a world out there with people who do not look and think and talk and feel EXACTLY the way they do and that many of those people will make your life a living hell if you let them. If kids were taught about differences and diversity and the challenges of being a good person very early on rather than be sheltered from it by parents who don't want to be bothered to explain why we're not all identical, then the world would be a much better place. But noooooo. Let's assume that kids are the dumbest creatures ever to exist and that their wee little brains can't handle the thought of a heterogeneous world. That's definitely the better way.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patricia

      I think this 7-year-old (who by the way is now a teenager) had more of a concept of reality than most of the people I see posting here. She has a chance in life because she has come from two very strong parents. It's more than I can say for myself; when I was 7 I was watching my dad beat on my mother and rape her. This young girl at least is spared other horrible realities like domestic violence. I would rather be raised by her two loving mothers than my weird parents.

      February 1, 2012 at 2:54 pm | Report abuse |
  99. skatimmy737

    With global overpopulation, this arrangement makes perfect sense to me. So "helping humanity survive" is not a valid argument.

    February 1, 2012 at 10:54 am | Report abuse |
  100. Wildbluyonder11

    Explain to your daughters how they were conceived and born. Then notice their confused face when they wonder how humanity itself survives if there are more "couples" like you that cannot procreate without the assistance of a third party. Mind you, I don't care what you do in your own bedroom and it sounds to me that your love really doesn't require the approval of people like me or anyone else, so it brings to question why you seek the approval of the government. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Whatever "rights" you seek, I believe, could best be served by other legislation. Best of luck to you.

    February 1, 2012 at 10:45 am | Report abuse |
    • mr. Magoooooooooo

      "Marriage is between a man and a woman"... Why? The bible tells you so? Until people like you grow up and accept the reality of the modern world we will continue having to hear this type of broken record propaganda... Your point about explaining how they were conceived is irrelevant at this point in their lives. Your right, it would confuse them but so would explaining the housing market.

      P.S. I think what goes on their bedroom has you VERY concerned.

      February 1, 2012 at 10:53 am | Report abuse |
      • C.A.

        People can believe as they will. If they believe the Bible, then it's their choice. Why are people being called "ignorant" just because they happen to have a religious affiliation? BIGOT!!!!!!!

        February 1, 2012 at 11:40 am | Report abuse |
      • ab

        Hey newsflash,
        Not everyone is christian. Your religious beliefs apply to you only.

        February 1, 2012 at 11:42 am | Report abuse |
      • mr. Magoooooooooo

        @C.A.
        Not a bigot, just stating an obvious truth... Looks like like it hit home.

        February 1, 2012 at 11:48 am | Report abuse |
      • mr. Magoooooooooo

        @ab
        Didn't imply EVERYONE is christian, did I? I was responding to ONE person's post. Whether you're anti-gay or you are a bible-thumper it doesn't really matter. They both have proven, time and again, to be quite anti-REALITY... Kind of ignorant.
        Is it a coincidence that anti-gay and religious frequently are one in the same? Also, don't use the argument that the author of this article is getting a "degree in divinity"... because no "real" religious person would recognize or endorse it. If you can't accept that...too bad.

        February 1, 2012 at 11:55 am | Report abuse |
      • MandoZink

        C.A. – It's because the public face of most unwarranted prejudices is overwhelmingly projected from religious convictions, and blindly so at that. It would have been nice if religions, as a rule, were wiser to the deeper nature of human love.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • LH

      I would venture to say most kids don't want to hear details about how they were conceived and born!

      What is the difference betwen this couple and an infertile straight couple having kids with "Third party" help?

      February 1, 2012 at 11:18 am | Report abuse |
      • Alex

        While this topic is not my concern (none of my business who you marry), I really hope you do tell your kids how children are born at some point before they are age 12 (No younger than 7-8). They need to know as child birth is a natural process which they may find out in other ways and then be very confused. This is not like the housing market, that is not information a child needs to know, similar to the stock market or taxes. Those are topics for adults and young adults. Relying on the school to tell them about child birth makes you one of those terrible parents.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Paul

      There are plenty of people on this planet, too many to sustain indefinitely in fact. We will have over 9 billion people in just a few decades....and we must worry about not enough people having kids?? Think about it for a second and realize the fallacy of that argument.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:19 am | Report abuse |
    • jk105

      My legal marriage to my spouse is man and man. It is indeed legal in New York State and was performed by a minister. It may not be a marriage to you, but it is a marriage to me, to the state and to my God.

      February 1, 2012 at 11:40 am | Report abuse |
    • xab

      Your last sentence is offensively patronizing and hopefully will be ignored by the author for the noisome bigotry it attempts to conceal. And please do not call them a "couple" in quotations as if they aren't one. I hope you find the love and companionship they've found because it surely seems like you need it. Why else be so bitter and disparaging?

      February 1, 2012 at 11:40 am | Report abuse |
    • Ann

      Where is this all heading? First gay marriage (in my view totally unnatural), now polygamists are hoping to get the green light, what next? People wanting to marry their dogs?

      February 1, 2012 at 11:45 am | Report abuse |
      • xab

        Yes, because it is completely rational to correlate two adults in a committed relationship wanting to get married to a human and a pet in a noncommitted relationship where only one with the ability to make rational decisions wants to get married.

        Your analogies fail. As does your logic.

        February 1, 2012 at 11:48 am | Report abuse |
      • JB

        Way back when, people said the same thing about giving black people the right to vote, with the same extended hyperbole (first blacks, then women, what next, dogs?) Get a grip.

        February 1, 2012 at 11:59 am | Report abuse |
      • Primewonk

        I wonder why folks like Ann spend such an inordinate amount of time fantasizing about doing the doggy, diddling the daughter, porking the pig, or sucking the Subaru.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:18 pm | Report abuse |
      • CJ

        While I am totally against gays being married (not against civil unions though), I don't understand people coming up with the slippery slope that says gays marrying will lead to people wanting to marry animals. Honestly, if anyone wants to be with anyone (or anything) romantically, they can...even according to the Bible. But I don't like that gays want to take a religious practice and pervert it. Come up with your own union and do whatever you want but leave religious practices alone. Thanks!

        February 1, 2012 at 12:25 pm | Report abuse |
      • Miriam

        Animals can't consent. Neither can children. Marriage is all ABOUT consent - remember, "I do"? And all those questions that are asked during the ceremony to make sure you understand what you're getting into? Pick some other argument. Slippery slope isn't logical.

        February 1, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patricia

        Yes Ann, that's exactly what I was thinking: If anything happens to my husband, I'm not going back into the dating pool – I'm going to the zoo to find a romantic partner. Fool.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • Erica

        They already marry their dogs, Ann. Keep up. 🙂
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3004930.stm
        Granted, it is India and they do some jacked up stuff there, but just had to mention it. I don't disagree with the other commenters, but have all the facts before baggin on Ann.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • hmc719

        Ok so a man and a woman are the only ones with the right to marry. Yes, a man marrying another man or woman marrying another woman is perposterous, but Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries? Totally acceptable. Heteros are doing a spectacular job of preserving marriage.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • Bible Clown

        "what next? People wanting to marry their dogs?" Maybe there's hope for you, huh?

        February 1, 2012 at 5:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Primewonk

      Continuation of a species occurs at the population level, not the individual level. Plus, the percent of folks born gay is fairly stable. Letting gays marry will not suddenly result in hundreds of millions of straight folks magically becoming gay and no longer procreating. Plus, being born gay does not mean you are born sterile.

      If you choose to be ignorant about the science of human se..xual orientation, should you really be on here demonstrating that ignorance?

      February 1, 2012 at 12:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • snowdogg

        Two women cannot reproduce without male input. Two men cannot reproduce without female input. Reproduction which subverts these natural laws is wrong... period.

        February 1, 2012 at 2:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • asterik

        So snowdog, are men and women who marry but don't have children wrong and unnatural too? I don't see how being married and having kids are necessarily related.

        February 1, 2012 at 3:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • Bible Clown

        Snowdogg, going up in an airplane ain't natural either, and God never made low-fat milk. Heck, SHOES are an obvious contradiction of the natural order of things. But what you gonna do?

        February 1, 2012 at 5:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • MashaSobaka

      Looks like a seven-year-old child can be more educated about the diversity of the possibilities of reproduction than you are. Way to go. That kind of ignorant stupidity takes skill.

      February 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
1 2