Your opinion of Gay Marriage

[Illuminati Blood Drinker]

You all know the drill.

I myself support full marriage rights.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Support, but I'd be fine with civil unions too.

[opebo]

How is 'homosexuality is a sin' even relevant, anyway?

I despise marriage of any kid of course.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Support.

[Antonio the Sixth]

How is 'homosexuality is a sin' even relevant, anyway?

Indeed, even if it were a sin that wouldn't make gay marriage any less legitimate.

[k-onmmunist]

Support, obviously.

[Roemerista]

I would prefer the word "Marriage" just replaced with civil union in any relation with the state. E.g., you cannot get "married" through the state, and any benefits of being married would be applied to this civil union. Words are powerful, and this distinction is causing enough unnessary issues.

My position? Domestic Union for everyone as far is the state is concerned. And Marriage? Why that would have to deal with the traditions of a said personal institution.

[J. J.]

The only problem I have with it is actuarial.

[tpfkaw]

I don't think it's the province of the state to define what is and isn't marriage - that's for people to decide within the context of their own religion and personal morality.  I think that all state-sanctioned "marriage" should be eliminated, and any two consenting adults who wish to file a joint tax return should be allowed to do so, and that any two consenting adults of any gender or relation should be allowed to legally designate each other as next of kin.

But yes, if the state is maintaining its monopoly on the marriage franchise, it might as well be extended to as many people as possible.

[Phony Moderate]

Support, obviously.

[Edu]

Support, and glad to oive in a country that has it.

[Thomas D]

Support, obviously.

[CatoMinor]

Support, obviously.

[You kip if you want to...]

Support [/not a fascist]

[GMantis]

Oppose. This completely contradicts the point of marriage.

[GMantis]

Support [/not a fascist]

I can almost see the straw flying.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Oppose. This completely contradicts the point of marriage.

Uh, how so?

[Franzl]

Oppose. This completely contradicts the point of marriage.

Uh, how so?

Oh come on, BRTD...you know perfectly well what he means. (Even though I very strongly disagree with the notion.)

[dead0man]

support

[Free Palestine]

I support same-sex marriage rights, but at the state level unless we can come up with a Constitutional amendment.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Support.

[Frink]

Support

[courts]

I don't think it's the province of the state to define what is and isn't marriage - that's for people to decide within the context of their own religion and personal morality.  I think that all state-sanctioned "marriage" should be eliminated, and any two consenting adults who wish to file a joint tax return should be allowed to do so, and that any two consenting adults of any gender or relation should be allowed to legally designate each other as next of kin.

But yes, if the state is maintaining its monopoly on the marriage franchise, it might as well be extended to as many people as possible.

[Free Palestine]

I also agree with wormyguy.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

The Federal government has NO LEGAL JURISDICTION regarding marriage. Powers not specifically deligated to the federal government nor prohibited to the states are the rights of the states and the people. Thus it must be left to the states. On the state level, I personally view homosexuality as sin and is not in the best intrest of conduct in a free society. So no marriage or civil unions. Beyond that I do advocate nondiscrimination laws in the work place (except in faith establishments and the military)