CNN

My partner and I have been committed to each other for 22 years. There are huge financial and legal disadvantages to being lesbians. Why would we choose that? How could giving us the right to marry hurt anyone else? Public sentiment is changing. Young people in overwhelming numbers support equality for gay and lesbian people & public opinion in general is more supportive. So, homophobes, chnage is coming – get over it.

LOL. You can't stop progress!! All you backwards fundamental religious nutjobs out there should realize this is a futile fight.... Just look at history, the USA has rejected discrimination in the past and will keep doing so. You may be able to slow down progress but it can never be stopped.
Oh and by the way: the non-religious (agnostic/ atheist) have been the fastest growing demographic in the country for quite a while in this country, and will continue to be so while you morons keep spewing out hate and intolerance.

@ John in Ohio...

We, the people of California, have already voted on this issue TWICE, and both times it has been defeated!

How many more times do we need to vote on this? I saw on the news last nite that Prop 8 support is up to 56% from 52%. Bring on the vote!

I feel sorry for the voters in the states that have had their legislators decide the issue for them...

And this "it's coming whetheryou like or not" attitude, well guess, what, I don't think so.

As an indiividual, I don't have to recognize squat. IF PROP 8 had not passed, I would still NOT recognize or respect Gay Marriages and there isn't a DARN thing you can do about it.

Go to church.
Learn to hate.
Leave church.
Discriminate.

Thank you Focus on the Family, Knights of Columbus, and Morman Church for teaching us to be mean and afraid...Jesus must be so proud of you – NOT!!!!

Under the law ALL American citizens are EQUAL: men and women are equal, whites and blacks, christians and jews, and yes... even heterosexuals and homosexuals.

Under this same law there is absolutely no reason why an American citizen has the right to be legally bound to another and receive all the benefits of such union, while another person does not have that same right.

Period.

Whatever else you decide to believe in your church or mosque or temple or whatever is up to each person.

I want to marry my athiest dog and my sister and her two friends. I want my employer to pay for health insurance for the vet and my three wives. I want to push my agenda onto all gays so they can teach my ways to their adopted children. Then I want to force the schools to have kids read that polygomy is good for 2nd graders. Yeh, that's the ticket.

I think it is ignorant and inflammatory to say that gay people are perverts. When I read the newspaper about the child molesters, and rapists of the country they are almost always straight men with wives, girlfriends, and children.

Just saying....

To all of you who think being Gay is a choice....well, first – ITS NOT. Basically you are damning yourselves by saying that you KNOW its a choice, because youve made the choice! Until youve walked in our shoes, then shut the hell up. Most of us spent years praying to God to make it go away – until one day we woke up and after our prayers werent answered, realized that God made us EXACTLY how he wanted us to be!

Im just going to assume that all of you saying its a choice are a bunch of closet cases!

Kyle May 27th, 2009 3:54 pm ET

If homosexual marriage is forced on the nation by judicial fiat, then not long after homosexual activists will begin to sue Christian churches for "discrimination" when the church refuses to "marry" them in an attempt to bankrupt every church in the nation except for those pseudo-churches which back their so called "lifestyle."

______________________________________________________

Kyle – What you propose can NOT and will NOT happen. Why? The U.S. Constitution protects religious freedom.

Yeah, here we go again. The VOTERS have spoken, so the losers try legal BS.

Here's my party line, I didn't get my way in the Presidential Election so I guess I should sue to have OBUMMER removed from office.

The MAJORITY voted, but the minority seems to think that the Majority is wrong.

Hmmmm, go figure.

GAY MARRIAGE & HOMOSEXUALITY is Unnatural, because: It is natural that Penis goes into Vagina and not into Anus, Mouth, Ears, Nose, since those organs are made for other uses, not for sex.

@"Liberal Democrats are pathetic"...I am a moderate gay man, not a dem nor a republican. And, you just totally disproved the point you tried so hard to make . If it were a choice, would we choose to deal with people like you? @Phoenix...racist homophobe are we?

The law of Nature proves a destructive trait (homosexuality can not naturally reproduce) can not continue through out time – unless it's a birth-defect.

SO WHICH IS IT? Is being gay a birth-defect or a choice?

I do not understand the argument that gay people would be allowed to sue a religious organization if they were allowed to get married. If you are not Catholic, are you allowed to get married in a Catholic Church? No. Why? because it is against their rules. Religious institutions are protected by our Constitution.

I knew I liked Ted Olsen better than I like most conservatives!

Oh, and to all the bigots out there: gay marriage is coming. Gavin Newsom probably shouldn't have given you folks that sound bite to use, but you know what? He was right.

Whether you like it or not.

Someone brought up the 'single/married' aspect on the IRS forms. How about a change to 'single/legal partner'?
Gays have the right to civil unions which legally should have the same footing as people united in a religious ceremony. Just don't call it marriage. That implies a religious aspect. Although, come to think of it, in regular conversation, it would be 'We were married..., this is my wife/husband.' Wouldn't it?

Honestly, I don't care what people do in the privacy of their own home as long as it is between consenting adults and there are no children or otherwise legally incompetent people involved.

Sniffit,

By your arguement to protect minority rights, we should overturn smoking bans as well.

Collin Kelley – Beautifully said.

Collen Kelly,

You are embarrassingly ignorant.

@Keith

Well yeah... unless that gay man was black.

But anyway, point well taken. I don't think anyone disagrees that blacks suffered even more.

But that should be not reason to say that blacks can have the same rights as every american while gays shouldn't.

@ Collin Kelly,

In your lame attempt to disparage Christians you state,

"Jesus doesn't like looneys using his name to advance bigotry, discrimination and hate."

Collin, what does Jesus think about people who kill babies?

The republican FEAR is disgusting. God hates a coward. Please don't leak on me, I can smell your terror and it makes me want to puke.

Homosexuality is a choice, and not something that you are born with! Period.

If that is not the case, then any law based on issue should be struck down, including rape, incest, pornography, child pornography, sex with animals, murder, etc.

The fact is, you make a choice and you decide to live that way. In other words, your mind becomes perverted and you decide to live a perverted lifestyle. That is what the gay lifestyle is... nothing but a perversion of the way it is supposed to be.

Why don't all the gay in California move to Iowa, or MA, or ME or NH instead of trying to overturn the votes in Califonia?

Homosexuality is not natural or normal and Californians (at least the racial "minorities" in CA) realize this.

I support gay marriage... even if Obama doesn't.

I would also like to marry multiple people if the tax breaks can be used multiple times... poligamy could be a very nice tool for monitary reasons... I'm all for it... cause if it's discrimination for gays... it has to be for poligamists as well.

I would say to take it to the voters again next year.

for any person or persons to say they own the definition of the word "marriage" is like saying paris hilton owns the phrase "that's hot"

some people are idiots and always will be. its time for people to grow up and realize they and their religion are not the center of our universe.

@ Collin Kelley, who said "Homosexuality is not a "choice" or "lifestyle.""

I'll do you one better: it's still protected under the Constitution even if it is. Don't argue against their points when their points aren't points but rather just blather. You only let them control the discussion by doing that.

@ Obama victim; you are so wrong that marriage is not a privilege. it is between couples who want to be married, then there is shotgun weddings... I believe that people, all people are equal, and should be misrable like the straight people.

@Jeff, Texas, that is great for a woman, most women wear pants, maybe bring back the Annie Hall Look.Well the "wifey" he could be a cross dresser.

Ta Ta fer now

Lawyers will make money especially with the divorces; banquet halls will profit; hoteliers will be siniging in the rain when there is a run on rooms for honeymoons. Money, money, money!

@John

The point i am trying to make is that the two a not even in the same league. There was never a time in history where a gay man had to go to a back door to get food.

If we are going to deny gays the title of "Marriage", then let us do this properly. Let us strike the title of "Marriage" from all government sanctioned unions – thus further strengthening the separation of Church and State. We can call all unions, regardless of the genders involved, "Civil Unions" and let Churches call them "Marriages". Remove the word "Marriage" as a proper legal term and relegate it to its proper place as a religious term – which Churches can recognize according to their own beliefs.

How RICH is this.... people angry with State's rights now calling on the Federal Government to over-rule the California Supreme Court.

Hey – all you grade-school flunkies.... this country is not "America" – we are the United STATES of America.

Our founding fathers created a government which deferred to States' rights – with the Federal Government providing for only the common needs (defense, etc).

WOW – no wonder our educational system is in such disarray! You all prove that democracy real doesn't work.

If Obama wants, he can order his Attorney-General to legally challenge
Prop 8 in federal court. He doesn't because he won't spend his
political capital for a cause most blacks won't support. Race is an
inborn characteristic; gayness, on the other hand, is often a matter of
choice. Obama also has put gays in the military on the back burner.

Gays need to wait in line behind all the coveted racial groups Democrats like Obama loves to court. Now they must wait for a bone
he cares to throw their way. He takes gay votes for granted just like
Clinton did.

About time. If I was gay, I would have already sued the courts. Bravo.

@ keith, who said "when i walk into a room they know im black"

Let's get down to brass tacks: are you saying you can't spot most homosexual men and women when you see them? Get real. Go to a club or a performance of Oklahoma or something, then come back to tell us you still think that same thing.

"let them marry only they have to to comply with the following since they want it a marriage:
2 men- one wears a tux, the other a wedding dress one always has to wear womens clothes.
2 women the same applies.

This way we know which one is the husband and which one is the wife"
-----------–
Leave it to a stupid hick in Texas to write something so lame.

As of this moment, I have chosen the Mexican lifestyle. Buenas Tardes!

Ted Olsen has a long history of being wrong, and can add this one to the list. His suit is based on a false assumption that state intrusion is unwarranted. But, state intrusion is warranted because the gay agenda is immoral and offensive to most Americans - we don't want America to turn into Babylon like San Francisco.

Marriage should not be the hostage of religous organizations. Marriage should be a civil term. If you wish to have it consecrated in your particular religous belief so be it. Call it a consecration cermony for the religous organization and they can do that for whomever qualifies for their religous creed. Guess what I'm not a Roman Chatholic and I'm a hetrosexual and they wouldn't have to married me because I don't subscrbe to their creed of belief, but I still have a legal marriage. Come on people let's start using our brains.

Let's get a few things..ummm...straight for you crazy Christian wingnuts:

Human and civil rights should never be put to a vote. Ever.

Homosexuality is not a "choice" or "lifestyle."

Marriage is not a "Christian" institution.

For all crazy Christian whackjobs, we didn't vote on who you could marry, cheat on and divorce, so please don't tell us how to lead their lives. Go look up what it means to be a Christian, learn it and then live it. Jesus doesn't like looneys using his name to advance bigotry, discrimination and hate.

Tom,
I love that quote! Thank you!

Chris,
Show me where in our tax and legal code the words "civil union" appear? They don't. However, married and spouse does.

Separate but not equal is not equal.

Who are these people who decided that what the majority of VOTERS in California approved into the state constitution is invalid? They had their chance. If it was so important then maybe they should have VOTED.
To quote the President to his opponents – Get over it. You lost.

Divorce is the biggest threat to heterosexual marriage!

Why is it that the "family values" party are not trying to make divorce illegal?

I mean with Newt, Rudy, McCain and Rush all having more wives than most folks have fingers and toes I guess divorce is now OK as a "Christian Moral Value"!

@Keith:

so you think being black is better than being gay because you can't hide.
so if you could hide being black you should and you should be forced to live a white life?

what kind of american are you....

All goes back to Brown v. Board of Education. "Separate but Equal" is not equal.

Why are gay and ethnic/racial issues being used in the SAME BREATH? One is a lifestyle and the other is simply not. RESPECT IS DUE!

What state interest do civil unions provide? If the state is no longer concerned with supporting a mother and father to raise children and create a stable society, get the state out of marriage and civil unions. People can hire a lawyer and draw of whatever legal agreement they want concerning their "union". Why should taxpayers have to pay for recording and keeping track of all this nonsense?

Dear Keith,

How could you possibly know whether or not it's a choice? Just because we don't turn pink at birth doesn't mean we're not different.

Being gay is like being left handed, it's not a choice that any of us makes. The only choice is to be who are you or to be who are are not.

For all of you saying things about procreation being the reason to ban gay marriage...so should we outlaw marriage between a man and a woman who don't agree first to have children? Should older couples not be allowed to marry because they can't procreate? What about couples who find out after they are married that they can't have children? Should we force them to get divorced?

kevin in Ohio

Sorry man I don't play that side of the fence
ask sniffit

Mahatma Ghandi said this:
"First, they ignore you.
Then, they ridicule you.
Then, they fight you.
Then, you win."

It ain't over.

why stop with banning gay marriage? blacks and whites should not be allowed to marry. chrisitans should never marry jews. and allah forbid that a muslim marry anyone but another muslim. i'm not even sure that a texan should be allowed to marry someone from california. it just doesn't seem "right".

Just because 52% of Californians did not want gay marriage to be legal does not mean that it's the right thing to do. This is a civil rights issue... How can you vote about whether to give a group of american citizens a right or not?

At some point slavery was completely legal and supported by the majority of the people... But that's exactly why we have courts, to prevent tirany and ensure the rights of the minority... The courts have the power to make sure that every single american citizen has the same rights and responsibilities as everyone else.

Keith wrote: I cant stand how Gay's and Lesbians try to equate their "stuggles" with that of an ethnic group. I am a black man, and when i walk into a room they know im black. This is something that I can not hide or choose not to reveal. Being Gay or Lesbian is a choice! I couldn't choose my color.

Keith, did you choose to be straight? I'm guessing no. Have a nice day!

Jrzshor and Randolfph – you are both IDIOTS!!!!!

Chris

You think that equal but different works. Look what happened to the schools with segregation. It did not work, and it won't work here either.

@ Jeff in TX

Marry me?

I cant stand how Gay's and Lesbians try to equate their "stuggles" with that of an ethnic group. I am a black man, and when i walk into a room they know im black. This is something that I can not hide or choose not to reveal. Being Gay or Lesbian is a choice! I couldn't choose my color.

@ Mississippi Mike, the reliable barometer of reactionary thought here:

I completely agree with you. They should get over having a basic part of their freedom as Americans stripped from them because the LDS church and other organizations poured millions of dolars and thousands of volunteers to kill it the original ballot initiative. Its nice to know that so many people who profess to have the love of Christ in their hearts decided to be the new Pharisees and make that judgement on behalf of people they would never make any attempt to get to know. The people of California did not decide it, outsiders did, and the court decision can, should and will be overturned on appeal or in a new case.

If it happened in Iowa, it will happen anywhere: even in ole Miss.

Everyone concerned with calling it "marriage" are fooling themselves. You really think "marriage" is sacred in our society!? I mean come on, look at all the people that hastily get married only to get divorced (50% of marriages). You think what Britney Spears and K-Fed had was "sacred"?

I'm sorry...I was wrong. I'm being an idiot today.

@ Kevin in Ohio, who asked "why can't conservatives say the same thing to you? "

Because this is an entirely different matter susbstantively speaking. This is not election of a person to office, this is the majority attempting to take rights away from the minority by altering a constitutional document. Why was the amendment necessary if the CA Constitution didn't protect the right of same-sex couples to the legal benefits of marriage? Hmmmm? Well, if that right existed in the CA Constitution, making it necessary to amend it to take it away, then CA just started a massive game of russian roulette. Whose gonna be next to lose their rights to a majority that doesn't like them? The whole point of a Constitution is to prevent this kind of abuse. Maybe CA's constitution was poorly written...but the Federal Constitution wasn't...so have fun crying in your soup when Prop 8 gets shot down.

In reality, this has nothing to do with so called "gay" marriage. It has to do with a direct and coordinated attack on Christian churches. If homosexual marriage is forced on the nation by judicial fiat, then not long after homosexual activists will begin to sue Christian churches for "discrimination" when the church refuses to "marry" them in an attempt to bankrupt every church in the nation except for those pseudo-churches which back their so called "lifestyle."

Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities, and the smallest minority on earth is the individual.

The majority of people in Nazi Germany would have voted to put Jews in concentration camps, does that make it right? Should the state not intercede when the people chose something that violates our basic constitutional rights? If everyone in America wanted to round up all black people or Mexicans and kill them would all you people say "Well that's what the people wanted"? This is why we have a constitution. You cannot trust the people ALL the time, otherwise what is the point of constitutional rights?

Let the gays and lesbians have their equal rights. But do so under a new terminology, called civil unions.

I have no problem with these folks having all the benefits and privelages that marriage affords.

But I do have a problem with them feeling they have the right to use the word 'marriage'. If this was only about rights, they wouldn't care about what its called.

But so many of them are taking a hard line on the term, marriage, which makes for fuel for the fire.

Take what you need and don't be greedy. They should live by that standard. Why piss off everyone by fighting loudly over a word, rather than the rights that mean so much more.

Chris

Let them marry. Why should straight people be the only ones to go through the misery of divorce??

Jeff – Texas

You are an idiot.

Ahh, for the beauty of nature! Yesterday, I looked up in the sky and saw a flock of birds flying in a perfect 'V' formation and wondered what if all animals got together and said "down with procreation". End of the world, it seems.

those racist comments are self describing for Rush and Newt

As an incest survivor, I deplore the comparison of marriage between two unrelated consenting adults with a marriage whereby an adult has groomed a child for "marriage".

So stop insulting all incest survivors with that rhetoric.

Just be honest – you don't like two members of the same sex getting married.

We can agree to disagree on that part.

Gays should not have the right to marry ONLY IF we prevent those who are divorced from remarrying. If the bible thumpers want to use the bible in their reasoning, than we should follow the bible all the way.

Wow, John! Your comment reminds me of one of my teachers who used to say "GET THIS INTO YOUR THICK SKULLS". LOL! (Sorry, to make light of a serious matter).

@ MIssissippi Mike, who said "Californians don't want gay marriage, don't force it on them. It's what democracy is all about."

Constitutional democracy you mean. The Constitution was written and signed to protect the minority from the tyrrany of the majority. Are you saying Arkansas could vote an Amendment that takes away Afircan Americans' right to vote? I certainly hope not, because that would be flat out idiotic. Well, the same applies here. Either the right exists and is protected and therefore inalienable and not subject to being taken away by a majority who thinks themselves better and more deserving of special treatment than the minority, or it doesn't. If it did, Prop 8 was a nullity (hint: get your tissues ready).

So after Obama won the election by vote, his opponents can now go to court to overturn it? What was voting for again?

It's time for all citizens of this State to have "equal rights under the law". No more sperate but equal!

marriage is not a "right"..............it is a priveledge granted and regulated by society within a given state,,,,,,,,,,,,,,just as any contract is regulated...............the people of California have chosen to regulate this priveledge in this manner................this is why we vote in this country...............they are free to move

Why on Earth do you people care if two men or two women get married?

Really. I really want to know. What the hell difference is it going to make in YOUR life? In YOUR marriage?

WHY? WHY DO YOU CARE SO MUCH?

This is an interesting situation. On a personal level I support gay marriage/civil union...whatever the term d'jour is. The fact that this was put to a popular vote amongst the citizens of California...that definitely adds a twist to things. Right or wrong, it was decided on "by the people". The idea of letting each state make its own decisions vs. the federal government imposing things on us....very tricky waters, indeed!

And some say that the media isn't liberal? Contrast the coverage of the gay protesters to a people-supprted law, and the coverage of people-supported tea party protests to people-hurting tax laws!!

For all the left wingers who constantly say to conservatives "You Lost, Get Over It"...... why can't conservatives say the same thing to you? The people of California voted, the courts upheld the vote, so that should be it. Do overs until you win???? Sounds like sore losers to me.

@ Yves Charlemagne, who asked "Why are people not taking such people like Limbaugh and others of his elk be taken to task for such comments?"

Because when all is said and done, after Rush and Newt and their ilk are done making money off saying it, the media makes money off printing it...over and over and over and over and over again...and the only way to get away with that is to pretend it has merit.

If marriage is so sacred, then why are divorces legal?

Let's hope they lose again. Californians don't want gay marriage, don't force it on them. It's what democracy is all about.

@ John, who said something crazy about men marrying rocks.

The only slippery slope involved here is that if we fail to recognize the right of same-sex couples to be treated equally by our laws, "Proposition 9" might very well seek to amend the Constitution to ban interracial marriage or marriage between Germans and Jews or some such nonsense. You guys really don't get it, do you? BY FAILING TO RECOGNIZE THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS, YOU RISK SOMEDAY LOSING YOUR OWN. You won't always be part of the "popular crowd."

This is not about what people want. People didn't want civil rights for blacks in the 60's. This is about civil liberties or the lack of them. It is also about the separation of church and state, which the GOP have a hard time understanding.

I wonder if it will be legal for a mother to marry her daughter in order to get tax benefits? Or two babies to get married? Or a father to marry his daughter? Why the restriction on multiple wives? The reason that the state became involved in the religious marriage ceremony is to support a stable environment for nurturing children. If that reason doesn't exist anymore, if it is not in the national interest, then the state should get out of the marriage business entirely. Leave it to the church.

@John,

Well it may not be easy, but I did #8 for 7 years!

The hatred being spewed on all the blogs by homophobes is frightening. I am starting to feel that the U.S. is just a small step away from rounding up all the gays, putting them in camps, and doing away with them. Who cares what someone else does in their bedroom. Get rid of state sponsored marriage altogether and only do civil unions. That would solve this problem. Church and State should be separate. Unfortunately, religious groups don't want that either. They want a christian theocracy.

John wrote: Marriage can be only between a MAN and WOMAN.
Marriage cannot be between:
1…Man and Man…2…Woman and Woman…3…Mother and Son…4…Siblings…5…Father and Daughter…6…Man/Woman and Dog or Horse or other animals or birds…7…Man/Woman and a Car or a Truck or other Things…8… Man/Woman and a Rock.

So I should take back that ring I bought for my truck? Have a nice day!

The will of the people should NEVER allow the tyranny of the majority to suppress any minority group, especially in the United States where we have court systems and constitutional amendments to keep it from ever happening again. This fight will NEVER end until equal rights are achieved. NEVER.

Still waiting for some conservative Christian to tell me how marriage between gays/lesbians is a threat to my marriage. All I hear is "the bible says so". Well, what about those who don't believe? There are people who don't believe, neocons, and you are discriminating against them. Please – tell me how gay marriage is a threat to mine. Give me a good, solid, reasonable argument, I am willing to listen. Hmmm, still waiting because there is no good, solid, reasonable argument. Its discrimination pure and simple.

Jason...the court did not back anything that was unconstitutional...Prop 8 amended the constitution.

And there is no way the US Supreme Court even hears this case...Obama is against same sex marrige.

People like Britney Spears (married and then annulled the next day, now divorced from another man with 2 kids as the victims) do more to damage traditional marriage in this country than gay marriage ever could. If you want to ban gay marriage and not come off as a total hypocrite, you have to ban people like Spears from marrying as well to protect the "sanctity" of marriage, whatever that means.

Since the word "Marriage" is religiously based, the government should have NOTHING to do with this. ALL those who wish to commit to each other should have a government issued "Civil Union" contract. The religious component should be up to the couple and the religious institutions willing to bless them.....or not.

So much money and time and energy being spent on hatred, especially by those who should be the most tolerant, accepting and loving. Those "Good Christian Folks".

As far as "churches" or religious beliefs are concerned, I could care less and would NEVER get married with the rules of society's back stabbing, hate mongering, hypicritical, and bigotted organized religions in this country. Just equal rights under a goverment that has seperated itself from "churches".

If Marriage is Legal between Same Sex, then, Why is it not Legal between Siblings, Mother and Son, Father and Daughter?

"the Fourteenth Amendment protects the right of all citizens to make personal decisions about marriage without unwarranted state intrusion"

so that means that the following is also ok:
1. more than one spouse
2. marriage to animals (single or in multiples- at least one citizen is involved)
3. marriage to one's pet rock or other well loved object-i love my ipod!
4. marriage to imaginary friends
5. marriage to minors of any age (p.s. minors are citizens too!)

lawyers. got tolove 'em as they do have the best imaginations.

At one time only land owners could vote.

At one time women could not vote.

At one time a white male could own black individuals.

Freedom marches onward.

What I am waiting for is Alabama to pass a state Constitutional amendment outlawing inter-racial marriages. Shelby will be leading the campaign.

Then let's see what happens when the Alabama Supreme Court upholds it.

If discrimination can be voted in by the majority for one minority group and upheld, then there is a precedent for future discrimination being voted in by the majority.

The courts are supposed to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority!

states should have power to decide.I am gay man, but the people of California should deal with the voice of the people...They voted and the numbers dont lie, the people of cali say no to gay marriage

on that being said, unless marriage is defined by our gvt(they should have no role), then its unconst law anyways

But look at all the unconst laws...seatbelts, property rights, income tax..the gay marriage is the least impt..

Let's live and let live. How about this for some "common ground"; We completely get rid of the word "marraige" in all, local, state, and federal legislation. Let's replace it with "civil union".

"Marraige" can still be used, however, it can be up to that religious institution SOLELY for religious recognition.

Let's meet half way, and stop dividing the country by such a meanial issue.

@ Jeff – Texas:

You, sir, are a sexist idiot.

Marriage can be only between a MAN and WOMAN.
Marriage cannot be between:
1...Man and Man...2...Woman and Woman...3...Mother and Son...4...Siblings...5...Father and Daughter...6...Man/Woman and Dog or Horse or other animals or birds...7...Man/Woman and a Car or a Truck or other Things...8... Man/Woman and a Rock.

The churches should be allowed to marry the gays and lesbians just like us if they want to. The gay's and lesbians must have equal rights under the constitution. The most immoral thing in this issue is that all the religious Right are opposed to equal rights for all. The Bible does not, and should not dictate our laws.

The last time this kind of arrogance was allowed, we got black slavery. If people listened to the prejudiced jerks back then, blacks would still be slaves. At least some people woke up and realized that treating anyone that way is wrong. Its time to wake up people. It is wrong to treat the gay population this way.

Teleprompter of the U.S. May 27th, 2009 3:09 pm ET

When the people don't vote your way, run to the courts and hope they'll legislate from the bench and do away with anything the voters want.

Seems like a recurring theme.
----------------
Uh yea, like Norm Coleman, or Bush being SELECTED rather then VOTED in. Totally with you dude, we RULE them courts with our crying and whining when we don't win!

Pot....Kettle.....Black

Following the logic of the sheeple...YOU LOST...GET OVER IT.

Sounds kinda stupid, don't it?

What happened to the will of the PEOPLE? The citizens of California voted and settled the matter. Of course this would not be the first time that some far-left liberal judge overturned a proposition.

As someone who has been married to the same wonderful man for 15 years (and is in a interracial marriage – illegal not so long ago) I agree 100% with the people who are fighting to overturn prop 8! Same sex marriage will be legal soon!

How can a court back something that is unconstitutional? that's crazy.

@ Jeff – Texas, who said "This way we know which one is the husband and which one is the wife"

Dude, move out of TX for a while...most places in this country that actually made it into the 21st have plenty of straight people who can tell. Yeah, that's right, gaydar is "catchy." BOO!

this is the united states we vote on what we want ,and what we need ; and most of all we vote on what is right ,and what is wrong. The people in CAL. have already said what they think is right . We should stand by them. If we don't we truely live in a country where the goverment tells us what's wrong ,and right. (AND THAT'S NOT THE UNITED STATES)

Gingrich is losing it.

OMG.....................you might want to use another example because reading this just reminded me of why the S.C. shouldn't "SELECT" the President of the U.S. Didn't anyone get the lesson of doing so these past 8 years?

That's interesting. If this case makes it to the S.C., all eyes will be on Justice Kennedy. We already know which way the others will go, so Justice Kennedy will be the tie-breaker. If the Court is going to settle the gay marriage dispute, it will have to go through him, and while he toward the conservative bloc, he did author the Lawrence v. Texas decision. This should make for good drama.

It's interesting that the very people who are the most outspoken that Obama was elected by a majority of the American people and therefore deserves all our support are the very same who are most vocal that Prop 8, passed by a majority of the voters, should be overturned. Are we a democracy or not?

I heard of a goy wanting to marry his donkey.. Does he have the same rights as gays? Not much difference.

Ted Olson leading the case against Prop 8? Olson was a potential Supreme Court nominee for George W. Wait until Rush hears about this! Further evidence of the splintering of the Republican Party!

When the people don't vote your way, run to the courts and hope they'll legislate from the bench and do away with anything the voters want.

Seems like a recurring theme.

Now this is the kind of bi-partisanship I like to see!!!

pervert and sick..... get over it you lost ....move to new hamphshire ....were the motto of " live free or die " is now : if you cant be happy be gay"

Ready to learn your lesson religiots? You can't have it both ways:

Either "marriage" as used by our laws DOES NOT have anything to do with the religious institution of marriage as required by the First Amendment (i.e., you CANNOT read religious connotations into it); OR

"Marriage" CANNOT be used in our laws.

Choose. Keep the word to yourselves or lose its religious meaning...but our SECULAR laws do not exist as your personal repository for codifying your self-proclaimed moral superiority.

let them marry only they have to to comply with the following since they want it a marriage:
2 men- one wears a tux, the other a wedding dress one always has to wear womens clothes.
2 women the same applies.

This way we know which one is the husband and which one is the wife

I feel that people who make such outlandish comments should be held accountable when they make such statements. Why are people not taking such people like Limbaugh and others of his elk be taken to task for such comments? This is a disgrace if we, as voters, and citizens combat these stupid comments. Why doesn't someone come on this man's show and debate him on air? What knuckle heads!!!

Marriage is between husband and wife, man and woman. Gay couples are partners. I support equal rights, but not to redefine marriage. Put a vote out for supporting civil unions and it will pass. No one is saying people shouldn't be together, be happy and have the same rights. Just draw the line at "marriage". If it is truly equal rights they seek, it is civil unions that will pass.

We are never going to give up. We will fight and fight and fight. We have learned from history. Our time will come.