The Same People

You know...being an African-American man...it is offensive for people to constantly compare the homosexual struggle to the African-American struggle. If you look closely, they don't even rationally compare. Though gays may not be able to choose who they are attracted to...they can choose whether or not to act upon those urges. In addition, though maybe not an enjoyable life, gays do have the option to conceal their homosexuality if they choose. Until I, and every other African-American, can decide whether we want to be black...or choose if we want to expose our color to the world...I'd like gays and others who support them to find another community to compare themselves to...because this one doesn't fit.

Example: If an employer is going to discriminate against all gays and blacks, and both interview...which has the advantage when the meeting occurs? Hmmm....

Frankly, I find that this comparison lessens the degree to which people respect the struggle that African-Americans have, and continue to, endure in the U.S. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to continually hear this be an acceptable argument for gay rights.

the roman empire???? great comparision to make?!! it crashed and burned. hope that this is not a sign we are headed the same direction.

to me it is an insult to my Hetero-ness to have the gays flaunt their lifestyles. I am thinking of a Hetero-Pride day to be established so we do not become the minority as the liberal minority tries to push these prized points on their adgenda.

I personally don't have anything against gays. I even have some long time friends who turned out to be gay. they respect my right as a heterosexual however they cant resist confirming their lifestyles as legitimate to me at every turn. dont care what you do as long as you don't bother me with it. Marraige however in my opinion has to do with uniting those two spiritual sparks to create a new life. cant happen with two men or two women. sure you can adopt and pretend but it really is not "natural" no matter what your religious orientation or lack thereof. benefits were given to married couples in anticipation of helping them to raise their children something which gay couples cannot have "naturally". just my opinion and belief.

Comment: It's high time that those opposed to gay marriage stop elevating it to the level of Christian marriage blessed by God. As any true Christian is aware, biblically speaking,homosexuality and sodomy is a sin. Gay marriage is simply an avenue to achieve political,economic and social "equality" in the eyes of a politically correct "CALIFORNIA" liberal government. It has nothing to do with Christian values. "Reap what you sow". Let God deal with them. "The word of God speaks to those who open their hearts to Him" Fact not opinion.

And didn't Rome fall from within? From the article: All those wailing that gay marriage is an invention of amoral modernism might want to consider these lines from a Roman poem of the second century A.D.:
"The bearded Callistratus married the rugged Afer/Under the same law by which a woman takes a husband./Torches were carried before him, a bridal veil covered his face." Allowing gay marriage is taking America down a slippery slope. Not to mention that homosexuality is against the Word of God (yes, I'm one of those). And yes, it is ok to love the sinner and hate the sin. Homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God, and society in the past/present/future will suffer if we embrace and accept it!

Ms. Quindlen's should know better. Love and public opinion are not the final basis for arriving at ethical conclusions. If love is all that matters, why is she not celebrating polygamous relationships? Would she similarly call for love to "win out" if both a minor and adult claim consenting affections? Furthermore, opinion polls would not have prevented the Germany of the 1940s, or the kind of oppression that occurs in many Islamic countries. And do we not have a responsibility to at least note that credible research has suggested that children thrive best in relationships with a heterosexual mom and dad? Thoughtful and responsible journalism requires at least some discussion of these issues. Sadly, it looks we'll have to look beyond Newsweek.

Very well said. I'm one half of a gay couple living in South Carolina, well, need I say more. We work, pay taxes, have a house together, business together, cars together and of course, three dogs. Oooooooh, isn't that just plain frightening! How our ten years together, loving, laughing, and crying is perceived to somehow threaten the "sanctity of marriage", is beyond my comprehension. Perhaps, just perhaps, it's plain old jealousy that we have not become one of the over 50% of hetrosexual marriages that wind up in court. The only thing we have "chosen" is to stick together through sickness and in health, richer and poorer..... hmmmmmmm.... Thank Goodness for California!

pianoman6969@aol.com

Oh so rational... Hey try this example. I'm in love with my sister. (I mean, she's really hot and we want to be together forever.) It is NOT fair that we can't get married! Everyone is sooo backward! They should get with the times. The old bigotry should be dropped! or... I'm in love with BOTH Anne and Sally, (and they are both in love with me...well and each other). I think the three of us should get married. I mean why not? And we can raise kids who will be totally normal and know how a family operates. Still there? How about this one. I'm in love with my german shepherd. I mean true love... Get the picture? Where does this stop? What does marriage mean?

WOW! What a beautiful essay. I love the part about "Love won." As well it should, but too often hatred is more popular, hatred and intolerance are the safe havens of the under-thinkers. Why bother to consider the whole situation when it's easier to repeat what Pastor Bob said about all those wayward souls headed straight to The Hot Place? Those folks with the WWJD? tee shirts might want to think -just this ONCE- what Jesus would do when choosing between love and hate. I'm pretty sure I know how he'd vote... and since the Radical Right wants to thump me on the head with their 7 favorite anti-gay Bible passages, I defy one of them to show me where JESUS said anything about my life and my love. When my partner was dying of AIDS we were smart enough to get all our legal docs in order so I was able to take care of him as he got sicker and sicker, and then hold him in my arms the moment he died, as I whispered "It's time to let go." SO don't tell ME that I don't know what love is! In my life, for certain, LOVE WON.

I think that Christians do not follow the literal instructions of the Bible, especially the words in Leviticus.
1. Don't wear clothes made of more than one fabric
2. Don't cut your hair or shave
3. Agree to be killed if you curse your mother or father
4. If you commit adultery, you must agree to be killed, along with your wife
5. Don't have sex with your wife if she's menstruating
6. Agree to stone psychics, wizards, and similar people to death
7. If you know of a priest's daughter who has sex outside of wedlock, you must help to burn her at the stake
8. You can't have a flat nose, be blind or lame
9. If you curse God, you agree to be stoned to death
10. You can't work on the Sabbath (and not just employed work; you cannot do anything except worship God--no washing your car on Sunday anymore!)
11. You can't make images of anything in heaven, or on the earth, or in the water
12. If you dream something that is against God, or if someone tries to turn you from God, you will agree to die
13. If anyone you know even suggests worshipping another God, you must immediately kill them
14. And of course the law mentioned on homosexuality

Apparently the will of the vast majority of the people, and their definition of what a marriage is meaningless to a handfull of judges and politicians. Then I ask this - what is law, at least in this country, based on? It is supposed to be based ont the will of the people and the values that WE, collectively, share. If "We the People" believe that a marriage is defined as an institution between a man and a woman, who is some handful of isolated cronies in a courtroom to decide differently? Let people love whoevere they want, I don't care. But don't erode the already-embattled institution of the traditional family even further by putting a committed gay relationship on the same societal footing as a marriage. A child needs a loving mother and father, not two dads or two moms.

For all the sound and fury engendered by President Bush and the right wing over "activist judges" who overstep their bounds in overturning the "will of the people",Anna Quindlen brings up a point I have always held at the center of my judicial philosophy - "the most sacred business of judges is not to ratify the will of the majority but to protect the minority from its tyranny." Thank you Anna!

While the democratic tenet of "majority rule" is by and large a good one, it should not be an automatic assumption that the majority is right. There are times when the "will of the people" is simply WRONG, and institutionalized discrimination is, simply put, WRONG. The Justices of the California Supreme Court saw to it that it was righted.

first off, i'm not a christian, although i was, but i have read and studied the bible many many many times. if Christians would actually read their book, they would understand that anyone who says homosexuality goes against their faith is full of crap. according to the bible, homosexuality is a sin. yes, if you are a strict, levitical-following Jew. read the bible once and awhile and you'll find that Jesus doesn't say anything about homosexuals. in fact, the only mention of it in the Christian testament is Paul's letter to the tiny little Roman church, where they were having orgies and screwing everything that moved in the name of Christ. that's it's. so, if you are having orgies in the name of Christ, you are going to burn in hell forever! but, if you're a Christian telling a homosexual that they cannot get married because they are sinning, well, you're also sinning because you don't leave town for 7 days during your period or if you look lustfully at a woman/man. if homosexuality is an "abomination" to you, than you have to follow all of the rules of leviticus or you are sinning (how was your Easter ham? did you have fun at passover? oh, right . . .)

if only Christians actually read their testament and studied the history behind it instead of listening to their biased preachers . . . your "sins" of judgement, guile, and hatred are a bazillion times worse that two men or women who love each other wanting to get married. get a flippin' life. this is why i became an atheist.

I have one hope for all on this board that oppose to gay marriage for whatever reasons..(even though it doesn't hurt anyone, makes people happy and protects them)....Anyways, I hope all those who oppose gay marriage have a child of their own that is in fact GAY....Then, we will see how your tune changes. I am sure you will want the best for them, and for them to live in a world where they are happy and protected and not persecuted for being different. God-willing I hope it happens!

What a crock! Such boldness and ignorance in the same empty breath. Clearly, authors like this need to do research and clear thinking before giving personal opinions.

The battle of this issue is not over by any strech of the terms. In fact, in all reality, it has JUST begun. Sorry to break the news to you, but WHOLESOME VALUES will still win in this country. There are too many people who stand up for purity and godliness to allow this type of obnoxious perversion and "lifestyle" to dominate the general public.

REAL love will win. But that REAL love is ONLY between a man and a woman. Get a grip and get a life! Marriage is still ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN.

The battle is on, and we will STILL win.

According to the Bible, which is the ultimate authority, homosexuality is an abomination, therefore, just because the State of California and the State of Massachusets say yes, that does not make it right.
God will be and is the ultimate judge and we, the US, will pay for this.

Indianaman - God would not call two souls in love sin. God calls us to love everyone. However, if the bodies of those two souls happened to be the same sex...and they engaged in sexual acts...there's the sin.

"The bible has slavery and beating women and children who don't obey as ok, and today we know these are wrong." - That's simply not true. These things happened in the bible, yes...but that doesn't mean that they were pleasing to God.

Just because two of our states say that it is ok, does not make it right. The Bible, the ultimate authority
on all things, says homosexuality is an abomination, therefore homosexual marriage is wrong. God,
the ultimate judge, will have the final say and if the US does not stop this, we will be weighed in the balances and found to be lacking and we will be judged.

Good people get to heaven. People who love and help others, people who treat others with respect, people who try to enjoy life, and live every day to it's fullest. It is now, and has been for some time, a matter of scientific fact, that individuals are BORN gay, they do not choose this. They are simply being who they are meant to be. I am tired of supposed "Christians" preaching intolerance in the name of God. If you are a good person, no matter your sexual orientation, ethnicity, or religion, God will welcome you into heaven. The bible has been twisted to benefit the agendas of those in power of our churches and governments, just as the Koran has been mis-interpreted by islamic extremists. God is love.

At the end of the day (or days), religion is a personal matter between each individual and God. That is different and separate from government. The role of government is to ensure equal treatment for all out citizens.
Legalizing gay marriage will not prevent those of you who believe it is inmoral to continue to believe that, or to teach that belief to your children or to preach and reach out to those indivuduals you believe have strayed. In fact, it will have no impact on you at all.
The same arguments against gay marriage were used 50 years ago when arguing against interracial marriage; the destruction of our society, the crumbling of the moral fabric of the nation, etc. Most of us would agree that those predictions were wrong. I say "most" because I'm sure some people still are repulsed by interracial marriage.
Lets discuss what gay marriage is not equivalent to:
1. Marrying a child. That is and should be illegal because it is damaging to an underage individual who cannot make his/her own decisions.
2. Marrying a cousin. That is and should be illegal because of the medically acknowledged risk of birth defects for any children resulting from such a union.
3. Marrying an animal. That is just gross.. :)

My point is that the only objection against gay marriage is one based on religion. As such, the California Supreme Court was right in acknowledging the unequal treatment given gay people in the issuing of marriage licenses.
I will admit that I agree that "marriage" is a religious institution as such, I believe that government should not be in the business of issuing "marriage" licenses to any citizen. Governments should issue only perform Civil Unions for both gay and straight couples and all legal and tax rights should derive from that union.
"Marriage" should be performed only by a religious authority and said authority should have the right to decide who to marry in accordance with their beliefs.

In the meantime, since so many opponents of gay marriage state that "marriage is the bedrock of our society, wouldn't you prefer that gay people are involved in monogamous, loving and stable relationships? More marriages mean more stability from that standpoint.