The Loving Decision

Yet another landmark Supreme Court case may very well be the civil rights case regarding the overturn of Prop 8 in the State of California. Though it may seem to many gay Americans like the morally wrong thing, it may also be legally right to uphold it...


As difficult as the likely outcome of the case will be for those of us who support gay marriage, the court's rationale will almost certainly strengthen a fundamental tenet of the progressive movement: the right of ordinary citizens to maintain authority over their state constitutions.The court's challenge will be whether the state will become the second state in the nation to extend the freedoms of gay Americans and allow marriage to same-sex couples, or to continue the national quagmire with regards to the reality of gay marriage and the discriminatory undertones of it in a nation that is just beginning to finally overcome the scars of slavery...God Bless America

The response about the penis and the anus and the excrement and the perfect bluntness is just wonderful except that its author disregards the ability of the prostate gland to evoke orgasm in men when stimulated through anal intercourse. But I am so "blilnded by [my] pride" as are "a great many like [me] in the media as well as political liberals" it's a wonder that I noticed it in the first place...

The last word, Ms Quindlan, is you and a great many like you in the media as well as political liberals are BLIND, just totally blind to natural law. Blinded by your pride. To be perfectly blunt-- A penis is not intended to go into a anus and be covered in excrement--clear enough picture for you now to understand?? Does not a penis fit just perfectly into a vagina and bonus of bonuses, such a paring often creates children--its a LIFE giving and life promotoing, adn a wonderful blessing in marriage, this design of nature (or God if you believe).

Those who insist on gay marriage as some right, or a matter of "love" are people who like same sex sodomy and want to do it with no stigma attached and have everyone applaud it . Baloney.. Its not just jews, muslims, catholics christains etc who can see the truth of what is going on here, it is many more Americans who have no particular religious inclinations, but they DO have COMMON sense and do';t deny what is so clear to the eyes and what you could see to if you were willing to open them and accept R E A L I T Y.

Wow! What a response your article has generated. Keep writing, Anna. You and Fareed are the reasons I continue our subscription to Newsweek.

I've met ex-drug addicts and ex-homosexuals but I've never met an ex-black person. The condition of those with same sex attraction disorder: SSAD people, or gender-disordered people, is more accurately compared with that of drug addicts. Both unfortunate groups need to be treated with compassion, but they need to be treated, and they know it. Both groups enjoy doing what is wrong and despising others for being 'straight', and are offended when not considered normal or accorded elite status.
Despite the endless Spock speak on both sides, is it not obvious that human beings are made to procreate and that marriage traditions are the right context for this. Btw infertile couples still uphold the goods of real marriage, so it would be silly and nasty to annul them, would it not. Also btw, Psychology and homosexuality have become new religions seeking to displace the older ones. It is little wonder that many people are returning to traditional religions. Homosexual activists don't know what inadvertant evangelists they are. Thanks.

Well, yesterday, Florida's law banning gay adoption was struck down.

The CA supreme court is going to listen to arguments against prop 8.

Things are looking up.

Ms. Quindlen, the basis for your argument in this article is that the people who decided that miscegenation was wrong based their argument on so called teachings of the bible which are not there and that the conservative Christians who argue against same-sex marriage do the same. It is clear that you do not have a thorough knowledge of the bible but only your own idea of what God wants. It is true that those who argued against miscegenation were acting outside of what the bible says, but on the other hand it is clearly stated in both the New and Old Testaments of the bible that marriage is something instituted by God between one man and one woman and that homosexuality is a sin--both gay men and lesbian women. Since the Christian Church operates based on the New Testament as the fulfillment of the Old Testament 1 Corinthians 6:9 is an important verse to show this, "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders..."
You base your argument for same-sex marriage on a false assumption. You assume that Christians just use the name of God to make whatever argument they want without it being in the bible. It is true that there is no basis for an argument against miscegenation in the bible but you are wrong that the bible does not condemn homosexuality.

In the anticipation of a new Obama era with a major changes planned in American economic and foreign policies, such will be the case in terms of America's dilemma regardnig same sex marriage. The Mormon Church's significant financial contributions to influence the vote on Prop. 8 in the State of California not only made Our Founding Fathers roll lover in their graves, but clearly violates our nation's Separation of Church & State and necessity for a secular laws and government composed of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branches of government.

The Mormon Church's actions now clearly jeopardize their non-profit tax exemption status, and calls into question why these monies weren't spent on children and families in need rather than political propaganda to support Prop. 8. Their support for a propostion that violates the civil rights of gay Americans is reminiscent of the protests against young women who sought termination of their pregnancies and the subsequent bombings of abortion clinics. Funny how the GOP tried to politicize the Ayers matter, yet didn't talk about those "Evangelical Extremists" who killed physicans who performing abortions. We must learn from our nation's history of civil injustices, whether they be slavery, racism, gender discrimination, and now sexual orientation. Interestingly enough, Sen. John McCain was one of the deciding votes opposing the Employee Non-discrimination Act on floor of the Senate in 1996. A "maverick" does not vote AGAINSTa bill that ensures the civil liberties of its citizens. Joe Biden should have brought that one up when he debated Sarah Palin, as gay marriage is a civil liberties matter, not a "loving" one.

Could you imagine if our US Constitution had amendments which legalized slavery, legalized segregation of men and women in our schools and workplaces, legalized paryers of all denominations in our publci schools, legalized a ban on alcohol, contraception, stem-cell research and abortion, and also legalized a ban to same-sex marriage? How could we continue to keep the words "indivisible with liberty and justice for all" in our nation's Pledge of Allegiance? How has our nation become such a a technologically advanced one, though we have yet to finally progress from our sad legacy of discrimination. Let's not repeat a Civil War composed of Yankees and Confederates, though this time with Straights vs.Gays. Our elected and politically appointed Judical Branch of government must decide this matter, not religious organizations and not these state propositions and referendums.Since, as we all know, a majority vote does not necessarily equal a consttiutionally just vote. I agree with Gov. Schwarzenegger in that the California Supreme Court should decide these civil rights matters. I disagree with Gov. Crist's support for a ban on gay marriage and adoption. Isn't the role of government and religion to educate its people , not disicriminate against

Let them get married. Why shouldn't they suffer like the rest of us?

In conjunction with the fight for equality by gay Americans against religious groups such as the Mormon Church, the battle by American scientists and researchers to freely use stem-cells for scientific research to develop potential cures for many of our world's life threatening diseases, may be soon won after our 44th President takes office.

President-elect Barack Obama is expected to lift restrictions on federal money for such research. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., also has expressed interest in going ahead with legislation in the first 100 days of the new Congress if it still is necessary to set up a regulatory framework.

Stem cells are the building blocks that turn into different kinds of tissue. Embryonic stem cells, unlike more mature versions, are blank slates. If scientists could control them, they could direct regenerative therapy, perhaps allowing a diabetic's pancreas to begin produce insulin, for example.

Harvesting stem cells from four- or five-day-old embryos kills the embryo, which outrages opponents of this type of research. But supporters say hundreds of thousands of embryos stored in fertility clinics eventually will be destroyed anyway and that people should be allowed to donate them for research that could help others.

"I believe that it is ethical to use these extra embryos for research that could save lives when they are freely donated for that express purpose," Obama wrote during the campaign in response to 14 questions from scientists, doctors and engineers.

John Podesta, head of Obama's transition team, strongly hinted that the president-elect would deal with stem cell research soon after taking office Jan. 20. "As you know, he has said something specific about stem cell research, so I think you can expect that what he said in the campaign will be fulfilled once in office," Podesta said.

Obama made it clear during the campaign he would overturn Bush's directive. It is truly breath-taking to see the advancement of medicine, no longer being obstructed by the views of Pro-Life religious groups who want to exert their own definition of when life begins in their attempts to ban abortion, yet contradict themselves by not allowing medical researchers to preserve vital stem-cells from deceased embryos to help save the lives of those infllicted by life threatening diseases.

The ban on use of stem-cells and the ban on same-sex marriage are both similar examples of why our Founding Fathers believed in the Separation of Church & State in regards to laws protecting our citizens basic freedoms...of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in these United States of America. It's quite ironic that a stem-cell will have been granted use for medical research in all 50 states, while hardworking, tax-paying gay American citizens must wait to be granted the right of marriage in a handful of states....God Bless America.