Freedon of Association, Freedom of Assembly, Free Speech, Right to Vote, Freedom of Church FROM THE STATE(as originally constructed contrary to current pop propaganda, Federalism, the right of legislatures to limit the jursidictions of the courts, the right of the governed to chose their leaders and make their laws are all compromised in order to achieve a Gay Marriage construct.

Opposed to Gay Marriage but wouldn’t be quite so much so if it could be achieved without destroying the rights of everyone else in the process.

Point well taken. It really is too bad that in 2008, gay marriage is such a big topic. I would argue that it’s the Christian conservative agenda that is pushing this nonsense not the gay agenda (though there has been overreaction and overreaching on both sides to be sure).

With Obama and the Democrats having virtually complete control of the federal government, we certainly won’t have any shortage of issues to write about over the next 2 and 4 years. It’s just too bad the Republicans will continue these idiotic culture wars; we can’t ignore their idiocy either.

I don’t disagree. I have spoken in favor of gay marriage several times. I do have a few gay friends, including two couples who are in very committed long-term relationships. One of the points I make to my mother-in-law (a devout Catholic and foe of gay marriage) is that rather than abstract her opposition to some state proposition, I’d love for her to sit down with our friends Manny & Chuck and explain to them exactly why she thinks they shouldn’t be allowed to be married. It’s very easy to dehumanize the issue and talk about what “the gays” are trying to do. It’s a lot harder to try to play games with their rights when you put a face on it.

All that being said, I view gay marriage as another step in the inevitable march of history. It may not happen for another 10 years (which will be unfortunate), but it will happen. The march towards liberty for gays is progressing. I think the point that DJ has, and I echoed, is that the march away from liberty for us all is also progressing. There are some major changes coming in the next several years, due both to the financial crisis and the election of Obama. We should be spending more time and effort fighting for those liberties we all enjoy, lest they be snuffed out.

Here in CA, Prop 8 had more money spent on campaigning for/against than any other proposition on the ballot, and any other proposition in state history. I agree with you that it is important, but is it THAT important?

Please don’t misunderstand: I am not trying to compare Prop 8 to the Holocaust; far from it. I am not gay and I don’t have any friends who are. But just because I am not gay does not mean that my liberties are not in jeopardy.

Personally, as a straight man, I’d love to see gay marriage debate be used as a vehicle to shutter the institution of “marriage licensing” entirely.

I don’t see this as a small issue at all. A threat to liberty for any person or group is a threat to liberty for all. Once we accept the idea that liberties can be voted away no matter how small or unpopular the minority, we open ourselves up to have our liberties voted away.

This reminds me of the Martin Niemoller poem “First They Came…”

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Please don’t misunderstand: I am not trying to compare Prop 8 to the Holocaust; far from it. I am not gay and I don’t have any friends who are. But just because I am not gay does not mean that my liberties are not in jeopardy. If we want others to stand up for our liberties, we must stand up for the liberties of others, even when our liberties don’t seem to be threatened.

Bread and circuses, my friend. Those running the show understand that if you let Toto pull back the curtain, you’ll realize that they’re mere mortals. They’d rather keep your attention elsewhere.

I agree with Tom. I also see consistency in extending that quote to sexual lifestyles and unions.

Unless it actually does pick my pocket, of course.

Now as to whether marriage ought to have State support or Civil Unions be coequal as to benefits have at the debate. I’m just a Pro-Life, Right-Wing, Christian, Conservative, Heterosexual, Capitalist Male. I’m all for tolerance. And as such keep you sexual habits and private lives private and I really don’t care what you do but parade it in my face and tout that deviant behavior as a good thing and – well – then you’ve kinda made it my business and invited my opinion.

Ah but should we go down that path what have we to fear? We will simply join all the great nations of the past who embraced homosexuality. I mean there was…….uhhh well then there was…… and….uh…???…HMMM….can anyone think of a great Gay Empire in History I’m coming up a little empty here? On second thought, perhaps we ought to rethink this idea.

I guess I am just annoyed that everyone is supposed to jump on the “gay marriage bandwagon” just because it is somehow a civil right. Being able to enjoy the fruits of my labor is a much bigger civil right than whether the government recognizes two people as “married.” I have been using this issue to get people to focus on how my right to eat any food I choose (trans-fats and other fast food), my lifestyle choice of being “fat,” has just as much importance as two people being married. It just seems too many people see gay marriage as a civil right and are willing to be obnoxious about it but are blind to any other issues of non-liberty, and that is wrong.

I guess it just comes down to the fact that I don’t respect a gay marriage advocate who votes for a “soaking the rich” tax increase. And frankly, if they don’t care when I lose liberty, exactly why should I care that they lost some of theirs? (Like Stephen, I also support marriage on the religious side and contracts for the state side.)

Sorry if this got a little off-topic of this post.