madman, I believe the portion of my post that was directly to you was typed after your name. If the comment regarding scripture doesn't apply to you, then ignore it. We all have a problem with sin madman, whether or not you want to accept that is up to you. That doesn't change what it is. Again, believing that two men or two woman being in a sexual relationship is not immoral, is up to you. Most people in the United States do feel it is wrong. That is why when left up to the people it is voted down. When up to the liberal courts it is approved.

Well, I'd say that YOU have a problem with sin then, lovestoscrap.

If you want to believe that I'm a sinner when you don't even know me, knock yourself out.

As for two people loving each other, I will not say that I'm sorry that I don't believe that can be wrong.

And when I write something that is a joke, I tend to use little smiley faces, like this :)...if you don't see that, in general, you may assume that I'm serious.

And tell me...what verses of your bible have I pulled out? I may have referred to some commandments, but I've called no verse.

87 isn't judging a person, he/she is judging the sin. The act of being in a homosexual relationship is sin. No matter who it is. That is judging the sin. Just like stealing, murder, lying and adultry are sins, so is homosexuality. You non-Christians love to pull out Bible verses when you can twist it to fit your purposes. The Bible says we are not to judge whether or not someone is going to heaven or not. We are indeed supposed to judge whether something is sin or not. Actually, God has already done the judging for us. He calls it sin in the Bible. Therefore, we already know it is sin and therefore wrong.

Madman, I saw your question posted previously. I thought you were joking. I would say your first sin is actually believing you are without sin. All have sinned. The Bible says if you even look at another woman with lust in your heart, you have committed adultry. Those of us who have gotten rid of the obvious sins in our lives still deal with sins of the heart on a daily basis.

"However, in teh US we've already had our attempt at "Separate but equal" and it failed miserably because it was merely separate, but never equal. We as a people need to learn from that mistake."
-
I never called for a fair but equal anything. I called for domestic partnership that provides the same coverage as marriage for those that want it, without using the hot button word marriage.

rockstars; Yes you can take all the blacks, jews, mexicans, eto, but ONLY if they are gay!! For the record I have no problem living in harmony with blacks, mexicans, and jews, etc, and by the way God did create Adam & Eve

87...

...tell me exactly WHICH part of this statement your really mean...

"We are all sinners and I am not judging anyone, just pointing out that their actions are sin."

You can't have it both ways...you are either NOT going to judge others or you ARE going to, which is what you say when you say that we are all sinners. Or are you going to hide behind the bit about "just pointing out the actions" part? If you are, who are you to make the call as to whether the actions ARE actually sinful or maybe just not your cup of tea.

I asked someone else this question and never got a straight answer, so I shall ask it of you, 87...

What sins have I committed? Exactly HOW am I a sinner?

RetiredAirForce - On the face of it, what you are stating sounds very reasonable. Call it something else but treat is equally. However, in teh US we've already had our attempt at "Separate but equal" and it failed miserably because it was merely separate, but never equal. We as a people need to learn from that mistake.

Child marriages - This all boils down to the age of consent, something that has frequently changed in the US (and isn't universal from one state to another). It wasn't really that long ago in the US when girls wed as early as 12. I'm not arguing for such a thing, but we need to recognize this fact.

That said, marriage is an act between CONSENTING adults. Pedophilia is a crime because children CANNOT consent, so how exactly are they to be a consenting member of a marriage?

Same sex marriage does not weaken "traditional" marriage. Not a single person has ever been able to explain to me how two men getting married weakens my marriage to my wife. Not once. If this was really the case, I'm sure someone would've explained that to me by now.

Fear and bigotry are NOT a solid basis for arguing against equal rights. Bear in mind that it wasn't all that long ago that interracial marriages were illegal in the US...we've come a long way as a people, but we still have a distance to travel.

The whole same-sex marriage issue is a huge minefield because there are so many different issues involved.

First there is religion. This, to me, is the easiest to dismiss. The passage of same sex marriage does not *force* churches to perform, nor recognize, such marriages.

People of one religious persuasion have ZERO right to force their own religious beliefs on another (no matter how well intended). In fact, we are at WAR with people who force their religious beliefs on others. Just something to keep in mind.

Finally, if the people using religious grounds stopped picking and choosing things that they are not allowed to do? I'd respect that more. So the religious argument only even holds ANY sort of water when coming from Hassidic Jews and the Amish. Even then it holds no power over anyone else's beliefs, it merely avoids being hypocritical.

Next there is the fact that the US government recognizes and gives special rights to married couples. Hence, discriminating against certain people being able to have certain rights flies in the face of "All men are created equal." Apparently, some folks are more equal than others.

Now, people use this argument to put forth arguments that it will allow all sorts of other types of marriages so let's look at that.

Polymagy - Practiced in the US by numerous communities. Practitioners avoid criminal charges by having only one "legal" marriage. While some of these communities are filled with abuse, this is NOT the case in all. The rejection of Polygamy by the Mormon church was a requirement for Utah's statehood. That said, so long as people are consenting adults, I don't really care what they do. So long as it does not give them ADDITIONAL benefits from the government, I don't care.

Marrying animals - This is a fairly weak argument. Animals are not considered to be able to "consent" to begin with. So even if we wanted to treat animals as human (which nobody is trying to do), this would not be a marriage between two consenting adults. Indeed, one of the basic arguments (among MANY) against bestiality is that animals cannot consent and thus it is abuse.

And, yes, 87, you ARE judging.

87, you're actions are sin, too, when you kiss your husband/wife. You're speaking out of pure bigotry. "Two gay guys kissing is gross." WT*? It's not like your kids need to watch two guys (or ANYONE for that matter) to have sex.

For all the gay lovers who say "how is it hurting you?" The answer is it hurts our society and I don't want my young children growing up seeing 2 (or 3) gay guys getting married. Two gay guys kissing is gross, the bible says its wrong and I don't want it to get worse. Yes it is hurting me because it corrupts my country/state/town which hurts my children. We are all sinners and I am not judging anyone, just pointing out that their actions are sin.

realitybytes: thank you! I don't understand how people don't realize that marriage is a contract.

KathrynSullivan: my partner and I are in the exact same boat as you. All we want is to be able to get married and have the legal right to make important decisions for each other should the worst ever happen. I don't want to spend years on life support if I will never be the normal human being I am today! And, I want him to be able to see me!

ozzman99: Marriage is absolutely NOT a religious institution. It is a government contract. Idaho's "Reverend" Warren Jeffs should be able to answer all your questions on that (from jail, that is) since he performed all those binding "marriages" of older men to teenage brides. I suppose since it was approved in his "church" and no government agency contract was never signed by these children, that it was appropriate since you think marriage is a religious institution. I fail to understand where people want to legislate hate. The government should (and I hope does) always act in the bests interests of the people, INCLUDING MINORITIES (gays and lesbians, too!), regardless of what proposed legislation is. That's why the gay marriage ban got overturned in Iowa; because it legislated hate and discrimination. The government has a right AND obligation to protect the people, even if the decision is poorly received by the majority. As far as the polygamy thing between consenting ADULTS, well, I've got mixed feelings on that. I think it would be extremely difficult to locate a group of individuals who claim to love each other in the group the same and be devoted to him/her without finding concerns of jealousy, infidelity, and the likelihood of a complete familial breakdown. But, I would need further information to form an appropriate response to that.

controlledchaos: what you're suggesting is called segregation. I'm all for going out to California for the weather, though. I suppose you'd want us to take all the blacks, Mexicans, and Jews with, too, huh? You're suggestion is moronic. And for the record, God didn't create Adam and Eve, either. They evolved from primates.

Arguments about pedophilia, polygamy, and wanting to marry your pit bull are made by small-minded bigots. The same ones who think gay bashing and beatings are fun stuff. I pity you.

Who among you knows a gay person? If you had a son or daughter who was gay or lesbian, wouldn't you want the same rights, the same happiness for that child as your others?

Harvey Milk encouraged gays to come out to their families so they could begin see the faces, so they understand and start changing things. That will happen.

I'm all for allowing gay marriage as long as they allow polygamy as well. Using the gay marriage argument, what is wrong with three or more consenting adults who decide to enter into a binding contract such as marriage? don't polygamists have fundamental rights as well? Or should the government do what I think it sould do and get out of the marriage business. Marriage is a religious institution.

Rock on KathrynSullivan!!!!!You hit the nail right on the head!!!!!!

RAF: Agreed. Whatever it's called, gay folks should have the right to be just as miserable as the rest of us LOL. Personally I think this is another "hot button" issue (like abortion), that comes into the news every so often while the legislators and congresspersons are busy picking our pockets elsewhere. It's a diversion folks!

"Why do so many people have problems with the concept of domestic partners?"
-
I think if it was put on the ballot as domestic partners and the law was for domestic partners, most would pass it. The problem many have is another word, marriage. Why do people who want to be part of a domestic partnership have to have the word marriage tied to it? If the lawmakers would just write a law covering domestic partnership allowing the same rights as marriage I think most would agree.

Here we go again! I knew reading this stuff would upset me. Why do so many people have problems with the concept of domestic partners? Religion, religion, religion! Separation of church and state. Joe and Kathy have lived together 10 years but for whatever reason they don't want to marry. So why should they not be entitled to share health insurance benefits? My partner and I have been together 10 1/2 years and I ask the same question. Did you know without proper papers in place, she wouldn't be able to make decisions regarding my health conditions if I were in the hospital in a coma?! Marriage is a sacred institution to some - that's a religion thing... We're asking for domestic partner benefits people! Honestly, some days I do think about moving to Canada but I love my country and hope the best is yet to come. I live in your community, I pay taxes that help send your kids to good schools, I hold down a job that might actually help save your life, home or property. GET OVER IT PEOPLE! Please leave us alone...I'm not saying you have to approve of or like my lifestyle, but really what business is it of yours?

I asked my 70 year old mother about her thoughts on allowing gay marriage. I was surprised that she almost immediately brought up "the next thing you know they will allow people to marry animals". WOW. Who the heck is preaching this nonsense? Note that I said preaching...
A marriage liscense is a contract. Minors can't typically sign contracts and neither can animals. Having a trained chimp sign a marriage liscense does NOT make it legal. It never will be. PLEASE stop linking animal marriage to same sex marriage. It's a moronic arguement (sorry mom).

The human race was started out when God created Adam & Eve NOT Adam & Steve

Why dont all you people who want gay marriage move out to california and have your own little communities out there, it is already a messed up state out there with all the lefty hollywood freaks

Love the sinner Hate the sin. DO not judge for you may be judged.

AMEN.

It's a sad testament to the lengths that a small subset of people with aberrant behaviors, however genetically predisposed those behaviors might be, will go to in order to somehow legitimize their substantially unnatural, unimaginable, and simultaneously inconceivable and non-conceivable acts, once perhaps wrongly criminalized but now somehow overtly celebrated as "gay pride" in some misplaced, ethereal grab at self-acceptance and inclusion.
Package it however you will, this "gay marriage movement" is ultimately little more than a grab for benefits, as our idiot-in-chief Doyle has proposed to offer "domestic partner" insurance coverage to state employees at a time of such incredible economic crisis. And why is it that such assistance is needed? Perchance in reality people can't live far beyond the stereotype of butch and fem roles, as observation often confirms.
What self-absorbed subpopulation will arise to posit their legitimization next? The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) -- go ahead and Wikipedia that! -- or reclassifying bestiality as "interspecies erotica" (a la Clerks 2)?
Frankly, I personally don't care what you do as long as it's not hurting someone (without their permission, of course), just please try don't turn around and rub it my face, and above all don't ask taxpayers to fund it!
PS Oh, I know -- "but homosexual behavior is found throughout the animal kingdom!" So what?! This type of activity is generally limited to a small percentage of individuals and the actual behavior itself has less to do with sex and more to do with dominance, submission and appeasement. Cannibalism is probably more prevalent, and no one tries to justify that activity (though I do think that "His Excellency President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin Dada, VC, DSO, MC, CBE" did proclaim them to be "the other, other white meat", but I'm just chalking that one up as sour grapes by the opposition -- at least those left alive!).

You have got to be kidding, pudssweetie. You are beyond help. None of that will happen. I respect your freedom of speech, but your opinion is ridiculous and ignorant.

I'm going to take a wild guess and say you are quite religious, too.

And to answer your question "where do we draw the line?": where logic between those able make the decision to have a consensual relationship ends. This means polygamy, "MAMBLA" as you call it (it's NAMBLA), child "lovers", and a farmer/cow will NEVER be legal.

We all have our differences of opinion and we all should respect that. But what no one seems to see is the bigger picture here. If we allow Gay Marriage then we will have to allow Polygamy, MAMBLA to marry their child lovers and farmer brown to marry his prized cow. This may seem silly to you but it's not. If we pass laws to allow to pacify one's beliefs then who is there to say that laws won't be passed for another. When do we draw the line?

Rockstars - do you kiss your significant other with that mouth?

Hey, "Truth", maybe you should take your own advice and move to Canada if you don't like it. YOU are the one "pushing your beliefs". Me? I'm pushing for my rights.

Nope, RoadKing. I don't drink that stuff.

Oh, and thanks for getting my comment removed. Can't handle the truth, huh?

"Hey! People are interfering with my rights to interfere with their rights!"

Sounds like rockstar has had too many energy drinks

OUCH!

Oh, and dqandhallie, they're probably censoring you because you can't spell a damn word right. And the fact that your comments are extremely insulting regarding "pinko land". Get over yourself and quit being such a loser.

Roadking you go get them, they keep sencering the people that might think for themselfs. are they afraid of the truth or does it hurt some poor little soal up there in pinko land

I'm with latinmami2! C'mon, Wisconsin! :)

Oh it will be a great day when Wisconsin passes the law for same sex marriages :)

It is the right of the people invovled not the bashers and usually if you are so against something maybe the shoe fits. The ballots were confusing and many people felt so. Roadking you are IMO a bigot as to the statement and it should be removed. To those so against the issue adultry and sex unmarried is also against the law and the bible so what would all these people do if that law to was inforced? adults have a right to their choices as do all of you and noone is shoving it down your throat. IMO everyone needs to mind their own life and let others take care of theirs without prejudice and trying to change what others choose to do.

My question is why do people care so much to fight it so hard? How does it effect you?

Dogs are not adults with free will. So much for that bogus argument. I hope you didn't burn out too many brain cells thinking it up.

What if you have 2 dogs and you want to marry both of them...I suppose you can't do that because "polygamy" is illegal..
.
Its SO unfair!!!

I don't remember the specific wording, but I do remember being surprised after I voted that people thought the referendum was confusing; it made perfect sense to me. Were people just not reading the whole thing? Was the confusion to do with not allowing unions having similarities with marriage? If the referendum had simply said marriage is defined as between a man and a woman, then that would still leave the door open to define civil unions as essentially identical to marriage but not technically referred to with the word "marriage." Or was the confusion about something else?

Who cares.....

How can someone think that homosexuality isn't an abomination against nature even if they're not religious? It's completely ridiculous to think that man should be with a man and a woman should be with a woman. Just ridiculous I say. Pretty soon they'll be letting two dudes ride around on the same bike. Ever seen how ridiculous that is? Especially when the dude on the back is facing forward.

billnewbie...thanks for the link...funny stuff.

In all seriousness, the way the question was presented was confusing and did lump 2 seperate issues into one. I honestly don't see a problem letting anyone who's in love get married, but at the very least anyone who maintains a relationship and lives together should be given the opportunity to receive the same benefits as married couples, whether they're in a hetero or homosexual relationship. The more people who have insurance, the better we all are because premiums will (in theory) decrease. There is no reason everyone can't have the same benefits other than fear, biggotry, and hatred.

After voting I realized I voted against it when I meant to vote for it, so it should be reviewed!!!! They way they worded it wasn't right. It was only my second time ever voting and I was a little nervous on top if it. There were NEMEROUS people who told me they did the same thing. If I have the right to love who I want and be married, so do they. And who cares about all of the so called Christians debating whether or not they "should" be allowed to! If it's wrong according to God, it will be their judgemant day not ours.

http://www.parentdish.com/2009/04/08/dau...

Another issue that is going to be forced down our throats. Maybe we should allow all felons to carry firearms, child molesters to work at schools and reinstate slavery so the jobs will come back to the USA.
You can't drink, smoke, speak English, speak freely, eat what I want or own guns, and that's ok to some people because of the ACLU. That is not looking to help the helpless, that is "Thought Police"
If it's legal, we will find a way to stop you from enjoying it. If it's not, then it should be. These people have feelings too!
Stop pushing your beliefs down other people throats. If you don't like it, move on to Canada.

Hey Jviers, here's a link you might find amusing.
http://www.marryyourpet.com/

Bash away, gay bashers! I'm creating a drinking game based on this thread where we'll all drink every time somebody mentions the Rick Santorum "people will start marrying their pets" argument. Let the games begin!!