Loving vs. Virginia.

The court’s role (as one of the three branches of government) is to rule on the constitutionality of laws. Period.

Some day conservatives will figure that out. Even the supposedly gay ones.

Grow a pair and answer, please.

Regards,
Peter H.

Marriage is a sacrament, and it sanctioned by the church. The civil authorities have no say over other church sacraments and they shouldn’t have any over this one.

Civil unions for all would be best. The legal protections are needed for any two people who decide to commit long term to one another. Some churches sanction gay marriages, some don’t, but it shouldn’t be up to the state whether they do or not.

I think separating the spiritual aspects of marriage (which the church governs) from the legal aspects (that the state can govern) would cause the quickest, least painful resolution of this division.

She is not going to lift a fingure to help anyone else get there too.

I seem to recall that Mary Cheney supported the effort to overtturn Prop 8…

considering the ineffectiveness of the existing groups, I don’t see how it could hurt to have a new organization out there working on our issues.

Good point. Personally, I don’t think liberals or conservatives are being well-served on most issues they care about.

I agree with you Dan, it is time to reshape the GLBT leadership. But there are many normal GLBT folk out there, both Conservative and liberal, DEMs and Republicans. I hope there is a way that America could see GLBT folk working together in a bipartisian collaboration.

Many hands (and minds) make way for success.

Given that Barack Obama opposes gay marriage, does that mean our government is run by fundamentalist Christians?

I bet David and the rest of the gay-sex liberals can figure out how to contort themselves into little hypocritical knots over that one, support and endorse Federal bans on gay marriage.

And please tell me what exactly is wrong with my analysis? Address specific points. And show how the gay leadership is making a case for gay marriage that resonates in the heartland.

And please while you’re at it, ask yourself why you feel it necessary to engage in name-calling and insult a very good woman whom you’ve never met and with whose good works you remain unfamiliar.

Our critics do harbor so much hate.

Second, your need to see this in a Manichean manner as “CIVIL RIGHTS verses the RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISTS” blinds you from seeing it as it is and from understanding my ideas.

When did I use the terms religious fundamentalists or Christian doctrinal believers?

I used the term “social conservatives” to refer to less fundamentalist Christians and others who see marriage as a union defined by gender difference. Not all those who voted against gay marriage are fundamentalist. And you–and the gay leadership–would be wise to take note of that.

Seems your reading your prejudices and animosities into my words. Your very attitude helps make my point ever clearer–we need gay leaders who can address your prejudices and not paint all opponents of same-sex marriage with such a broad brush.

(And anyway, do you even read our comments? Don’t you know that we have a problem with the filter? It’s not that we’re not allowing you to comment. It’s just that the filter eats them up, including comments from friends.

Oh, and by the way, please find a left-wing blog that allows so many critics to comment so regularly, where the blogger goes out of his way to rescue such comments.)

Second, Mary Chaney is a spoiled brat she showed no one anything. Except that she is about as selfish a human being as there is. Her money gets her what she wants. She is not going to lift a fingure to help anyone else get there too.

Regards,
Peter H.

learn the role of the courts and stfu.

Let the games begin.

I find myself torn with these kinds of court decisions.

On the one hand I believe that same-sex couples should have the right to marry, but on the other hand I wonder how effective it is to use the courts to accomplish this goal (in the long term).

If a law banning same-sex marriage is in fact unconstitutional, yes it should be repealed. BUT what have we (the LGBT community) gained if in the process of winning the court battles we cause our opponents to become even more galvanized and more resolved to stop us?

While I find it offensive that such bans exist, it would seem our cause would be better served if we spent more effort convincing our opponents (and those on the fence) of the benefits of gay marriage, not just to LGBTs, but to society.

Having recently looked at the FBI’s hate crimes statistics it has become increasingly clear to me that the legalization of same-sex marriage is not the solution to all of our problems.

If the statistics are accurate, it appears that states that offer more rights to same-sex couples actually have a higher incidence of hate crimes against LGBT persons than the states with little to no protections (like mine).

Having the courts grant us rights we deserve doesn’t seem to be translating into an increase in public support.