We’re in support of civil unions, but not marriage. That’s our stand. If it doesn’t suffice, we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one.

But you are quite correct: This should not be a primary topic as we have more important issues to deal with. And your reference to “ridiculuous taxes” is evidence that we do agree on some things. ;)

In all fairness, though, you’d have to concede that the only reason this *is* a headline issue is because gay activists are aggressively lobbying for it. If they weren’t, we wouldn’t be having the debate.

p.s. to your point about the Bible, if God had placed Adam and Steve on earth, we wouldn’t be having this conversation, either.

It’s interesting that you should say that individuals can’t be the standard by which institutions are judged. Funny, as a gay man, I see nothing by judgment of my person in this whole marriage debate.

At the end of the day, it’s in the conservative movement’s court to decide whether they will truly bat for a unified America. As a gay man I’m not asking for unique privileges, I’m just asking that I be allowed to participate in the same values that most other Americans espouse: the right to start a family, to legalize the union to the one person I choose to love and try to duke it out for that love and that family like everyone else.

And yes, people of all political persuasions can can rattle off on Scripture when it’s convenient so I will simply allude to the story of Adam and Eve: did God enter a slippery slope when he put two people on earth to fill up a planet?

We’re a nation of sound judgement and compassion, we can temper tolerance with decency and common sense — let’s cut the nonsense and engage in a productive dialogue. The marriage debate is a no-brainer, let’s focus our thinking on addressing the real issues that are threatening the American people: the war on terror, ridiculous taxes, partisanship that hampers progress…

As for our analogy, we think it’s quite reasonable to suggest that federal recognition of homosexual marriages sets a new precendent of “entitlement” that will give others motivation to try anything: transgender marriages, brother-sister marriages, and yes, why not beloved pets?

And it’s ironic that you point to slavery and racism as a means to bolster your position. This is about sexual preference not skin color. We believe the majority of blacks (who are against “gay marriage”) would take umbrage to your comparison that special rights for homosexuals equates with their historical struggles.

And, Walt, thanks for pointing us to Jesus. Indeed, what would he say about homosexuality, let alone marriage? Let’s see. But why blur this debate by referencing the Scriptures? Most liberals only refer to them when convenient anyway.

Jesus preached and used logic in his decision making, yet His followers shun logic/science and instead choose bigotry and hatred.

Have heterosexuals, with a 50% divorce rate held up the sanctity of marriage? Have teen pregnancy rates and spikes in domestic marriage between men and women kept the insitution of marriage in the lofty eschelon it deserves to be in?

The same segment of our population who is up in arms about gay marriage is the same segment of our population who 50 years ago opposed inter-racial marriage and the de-segregation of our schools.

With all the turmoil that’s going on in the world why are we so concerned with forbidding people the right to start their own families? Why does this rank as a national issue when soldiers are dying in Iraq are dying for freedom?

If one more person says that the founding fathers didn’t imagine Steve and Greg getting married well they also didn’t imagine their slaves becoming Secretary of State. America is a progressive society and well-equipped to offer rights and equality to its citizens. Enough is enough.