I’ve posted this on other forums and have never received a rational answer. Name one nonreligious reason that can be used in a secular court of law to deny marriage equality.  

No slippery slope syndrome such as: marriage equality will lead to marriage with an animal (when Bessie-The-Cow can sign a legal document, call Ripley's Believe It Or Not), an immediate family member ( legal next of kin status already established), or a child (legal age of consent already established).  

Polygamy is a separate issue. If polygamists want to spend the time, effort, and money to challenge the laws against polygamy, that is their right under the Constitution.   

Being gay is a choice: irrelevant to the issue. Someone's chosen religious beliefs have no more validity under the Constitution than my (supposedly) chosen orientation or choice in my partner. 

Civil unions is the same as marriage: no, they’re not. Civil unions don’t carry the same rights and responsibilities as marriage. Besides, separate but equal has already been ruled unconstitutional. 

Forcing churches to marry gay and lesbian couples: the separation of church and state works on both sides of this issue. As far as I know no one has successfully sued the Catholic church to force them to marry divorced couples or non-Catholics. 

"You can marry someone of the opposite sex:"  discriminates on the basis of one of the couples gender (illegal). 

So, banning marriage equality goes against the First and Fourteenth Amendments, the Full Faith And Credibility Clause, and federal laws against discrimination based on gender.

Aulcie Smith

* * *

Perhaps religious reasoning is used to dispute other than one man, one woman marriages because marriage most certainly is a religious sacrament.

Marriage only became a "state" authorized, legal state when government functionaries figured out they could tax it. Ask any Quaker about their marriage ceremony. 

There are plenty of civil, legal mechanisms to accomplish the same end without diluting a religious sacrament and attempting to make it something it isn't.  

Lve your life the way you wish. Stop trying to shove your lifestyle in the rest of our faces and forcing acceptance by challenging a legitimate religious rite.

Royce E. Burrage, Jr.
Royce@Officially Chapped.org

* * *

This is what happens when you remove God, the creator of all things from your equations.  Who then is to say what is right and what is wrong? That is why God's word is so vital for our lives.

The bible is a holy book. We place our hands on it when we give testimony in our courts of "law."This includes swearing in a new president. God's laws govern our nation.         

Sin is wrong. We all do it. We all choose to do it. That's the beauty of Jesus Christ and the sacrifice He made for us sinners. His bloodshed covers us. Call on His name, repent and be saved. 

Nature itself teaches the depravity of homosexuality. Paul made it very clear that homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God. Just because one is compelled to do something doesn't make it the right thing to do. I think women are beautiful. My mind conjures impure thoughts in regard to them at times. Yes, I was born this way but I choose to not obey the lust of my flesh. I know the outcome is death/misery. I choose instead to honor what God invented instead and continue to be happily married and faithful to my wonderful wife of 22 years and counting. 

Stop trying to make man say something is okay when God is very clear that it's a no. God's word is the standard, not public opinion. Therefore, even if you find an official to give the thumbs up on your quest, the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob doesn't change His mind.

Michael Burns

* * *

You present a logical and well thought out argument in support of marriage equality and I completely agree. A separation of church and state is supposed to exist in this country but judging by the other responses that fact is lost on some. 

You are not asking that the church be forced to perform your marriage ceremony. You are simply asking why you cannot have the same marriage license granted by the state that any heterosexual couple has (regardless of whether they are married in a church or even by a minister). 

I do hope things change in this country and I feel like they will although it make take a little time. 

Holly Tallant

* * *

Marriage in the United States is a secular institution. It was the U.S. Supreme Court that decided the legality of interracial marriage in 1967. Civil law regulates and defines marriage not religious law. Religious leaders perform marriage ceremonies only because state law gives them the authority to do so. Hence, the line at the end of many ceremonies "By the power vested in me by the state of ...........". It is not "by the power vested in me by the church of......................".  

And while there may be many civil and legal mechanisms afforded to same-sex and opposite-sex couples who do not marry, the cost can be excessive when compared to the cost of a marriage license. Further, there are 1,138 rights, benefits and protections provided on the basis of marital status under federal law. These benefits are provided solely to male-female married couples because the Defense of Marriage Act defines marriage as between one man and one woman and supersedes any state law allowing same-sex marriage.  

Some of the federal benefits include 179 tax provisions that take marital status into account, FMLA, Immigration law, COBRA, and Social Security benefits. Therefore, marriage is a civil issue until all federal benefits, rights and protections are stripped from federal law and all federal regulation of marriage is abandoned. The only consideration or conversation that religious institutions should have about same-sex marriage is whether their church and church officials will preside over same-sex ceremonies.  

And again, lets make this perfectly clear to all those that don't seem to get it. Not everyone in this country believes in or adheres to Judeo-Christian theology or values. It is the political Christian right that is wanting to shove their beliefs and  lifestyle down everyone's throats and force acceptance of their values by introducing federal and state statutes that discriminate against anyone that holds different theological views. And to those people, "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is only for those that believe the same way that they do.  

Ken York
Trenton