Daughter of Eve

The handwringing and self-victimization of sexual identity politics demonstrates the need to distance the subject of marriage neutering from that of homosexuality. Legally, SSM makes no requirements as to sexual orientation, and most reasonable Americans, when reminded of that fact, can clearly see that the issue isn't about defining marriage based on sexual attraction, but about the common sense definition of marriage--what makes that particular relationship different than any other human pairing; what are its parameters, eligibility requirements, and core meaning? Two straight men who choose to enter into an SSM are no more part of a "gay" marriage, than a "gay" man who marries a "gay" woman, part of a "gay" marriage. Marriage isn't "gay" or "straight;" it's opposite-sexed. Arguing for or against homosexuality takes the focus off the real issue: does America value having one of each gender equally represented in each marriage union, and if we cease to do so, what are the consequences?

Dan

Well, I know who I'm voting for this time! He's got my vote for sure.

John Noe

This is good news to see that now Gov. Pawelty has signed on, just need Mr. Cain and Governor Perry of Texas to sign on. These are the six strongest candidates in the Republican field.
The Tea Party and other conservaties need to understand that it is imperative that they work with us. We can then take back the Senate, expand our representation in the House, and take back the White House.
If we stop this awful homosexual marriage in all of the states at least we can contain it so that this evil thing does not spread across the country.

John B.

Wait, is it "let the people vote" or is it "take the vote away from the states and from the people with a constitutional amendment"? (You do realize there is no popular vote when it comes to constitutional amendments, right?) Aren't you talking out of both sides of your mouth here?