[Paloma_55]

Gay Agenda... like a game of chess, they moved their Massachusetts' Supreme Court piece and are now positioning their US 9th Circuit piece into position...

By marrying these people AGAINST THE LAW, they are inviting a challenge in the 9th circuit which is more liberal than the Mass supreme court. They know the 9th will uphold the marriages which will demand a supreme court test.

Note; Nobody is asking the question... "WHY do homosexuals have a right to marriage?" They don't.

Marriage is not a right. It is a special recognition of a relationship that can only exist between a man and woman. The government recognizes as part of its responsibility to support things that are positive to society, much like it has a responsibility to oppose things that are detrimental to society.

EVERYONE recognizes that there is a line drawn between the existing marriage laws, and other forms of marriage that could exist if we open the doors or move the line. If we move it to allow homosexuals, who choose to behave in a particular way, what moral imperative is left to stop from moving it to allow polygamy, incest, and other social constructions that are socially unacceptable and detrimental to the long-term-interests of society?

But back to the real point here... this is a chess game and they have the pieces.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"WHY do homosexuals have a right to marriage?"

That's the wrong question, because they do have a right to marry.

What they don't have, is the legal ability to marry a person of the same sex.

If the question is framed as you framed it, the argument then shifts to the right to marry, and they argue that they are denied a right that everyone else possesses.

That's why they are framing the argument in that manner, because they already know the answer.

The real fight is to deny them the legal ability to enter into the institution known as marriage.

[MizSterious]

I'm hearing people like Ted Koppel compare the "plight" of gay couples to this country's history with slaves--and nothing could be further from the truth.

My primary concern with all this is that it will open the door to other "rights" among deviates--after gays can marry, can pedophiles claim their "rights" too? What about incest? What about polygamy? Will this country eventually legalize bestiality as Sweden has done? (shudder)

[kimoajax]

It seemed fitting to members of the press that a certain judge in Alabama be removed from office because he refused to follow the law. However, we need not hold our breath waiting for these officials to be removed from office for refusing to follow the law. It will never happen.

[claptrap]

If marriage is so sacred and you are so interested in the jackbooted thugs we have as GOVERNMENT OFFICALS enforcing
your religious laws upon people who dont paticularlly want
to live under your religious strictures maybe you should annex Idaho and create your CHURCH-STATE there!
DIVORCE seems to be accepted quite readily by you sanctimonious windbags where is the outcry when men and women get divorced and ruin their childrens lives forever?
Why dont you pluck out the logs in your own eyes before you go pointing out the specks in others.
These Gays as misdirected as they may be dont need sanctimonious hypocrites to run roughshod over them.
If your vision of this holy union is so holy why do you permit divorce?
I say enough of the holier than thou attitude on display
how about proving your holiness Ban divorce!
Using governmental entities to enforce a religious worldview
will turn around and be used against you!

[mtg]

End of gay marriage ceremony - "You may now kiss the person standing next to you."

[goldstategop]

San Franciso to California and the rest of America: "Up Yours!"

[EGPWS]

this is a chess game and they have the pieces.

And THIS is where the focus and concerns should be directed.

Check mate king two! End of game.

[Technogeeb]

Gay Agenda... like a game of chess, they moved their Massachusetts' Supreme Court piece and are now positioning their US 9th Circuit piece into position...

The rooks are now in play. With shades of Orwell, they have just quite literally changed the "definition" of marriage; it has only been a day since San Francisco started giving out wedding licenses for homosexuals, and the Merriam-Webster dictionary has already been re-written (the second definition below was not there earlier)

From

Merriam-Webster's definition of marriage

1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage b : the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage