You feel that your view is based on love and that the motivation of those with whom you disagree is hatred.

Your view can be summed up thusly: if not for hatred, all would be eligible to marry.

Right?

* * *

I think you ought to take care when you pose as an accuser -- those who disagree with you are presumed guilty of hatred until proven innocent -- while you also pose as a protector -- those who are ineligible to marry are hated.

No one is ineligible to marry because they are "gay". There is no such criterion in the marriage law. And "straight" is no trump card, as you must be aware if you are knowledgeable of the subject of marriage.

Instead of invoking opinion polls, how about focussing on the justification for your own assertions and opinions?

but if some disagreement's are not hatred, well, hitler also had the right to have their opinions?...and for example, if i want to teach my childrens (in the future of corse) to don't be a friend of a black person, i have the right to think that way?...i am just saying that we cannot judge people we don't know...i'm not hear to judge anybody i'm just hear to share my experience with gays...and explain me, why marriage is not just about love?...it's not important? marriage is just about procreate with each other? so explain me...why my 77 years old grandfather can marry and my friend Justin with 23 years cannot?...because 1 is straight and the other is gay...i live in a country where the majority of people support gay marriage...almost 70%...in america more than 50% oppose it i know...but 80% of young people support it, so i know that one day, gays and lesbians will have the same rights that you and me have and we will be looking to the past very ashamed, because nobody have the right to deny rights to people and to tell them what they should do or not with their lifes.

have a nice day

Thank you for responding. Again, though, how is it that I am judging? Simply because I disagree with the homosexual lifestyle? What, can anyone not speak against (fill in the blank) without being labeled as intolerant, hater, or bigot? Is this what we have come to in the world today where anything goes and there are no consequences? Lord have mercy on us all if that is the case.

Nope.

Oh well.

As for your remark to "not judge", you seem to be doing more than your fair share of that in your own comments.

Oh well.

You pose as if your asserted knowledge of gay persons is a trump card. It is not. Nor would it be for anyone else who met gay persons.

Your comments illustrate that for you this is about gay identity politics first and foremost. The rhetoric belies an ignorance and a lack of concern for the social institution of marriage itself.

i was just being ironic dear nicholas...many parents say that teachers cannot "teach homossexuality" for their children...and i ask it...how can a teacher teach homossexuality to a children? it's like french or maths? really i don't understand it....me and my brother we are all straight and we grew up surrounded by gay people... and they are just amazin' persons...they have amazing stories to tell...really...who are you to judge?...God said to love your neighbor not to hate....and i do that everyday...so, try to meet someone...some family's, i guarantee that you will not regret...God don't hate those who love...and children's need someone who loves them.

Based on your last question/statement, are you saying that homosexuality is a learned behavior akin to learning a second language? If so, doesn't that go against the multitude of gays/lesbians that say they were "born this way?" So, which is it then, learned (nurture) or innate (nature)?

Based on your last question, are you saying that homosexuality can be taught or learned? If that is the case, that flies in the face of all the homosexuals that say they were "born this way." So which is it then? Is homosexuality learned (nurture) or innate (nature)?

Also, your comment about the Bible and not judging is interesting. No doubt Jesus did say not to judge others lest you be judged; if the fact that someone disagrees with your lifestyle, how is that a judgement upon you? What, can no one have a dissenting belief on SSM (homosexuality) without being castigated?

have a nice day

have a good day

As Kevin conceded with his oft-repeated example of adultery and divorce, when marriage means less, it harms society.

Meanwhile Perry jumps in to namecall because no SSM argument is really a bonafide argument until its first axiom is invoked: that to disagree is a mark of a pez-sized brain. Yet his own logic is deeply undermined by his utter reliance on sentiment over reason. He has no clue of statistical analysis and yet repeats, ad nauseaum, the weak pro-SSM talking points of the anti-marriage crowd.

Neither of these two commenters favor protecting marriage. Their anti-marriage remarks keep reminding us that SSMers have nothing but contempt for the social institution and for those who stand-up to reaffirm and to strengthen marriage in our society.

Slippery slope arguments do not work. Nobody is arguing in favour of those things, nobody is trying to pass laws to allow those things. If people who want to marry their siblings come forward and say "well gay people can marry," this won't change any opinions or laws unless they can make a good case on their own.
Those same arguments also exists simply because MARRIAGE exists, heterosexual marriage.
If a man and a woman can get married, then why can't a man marry his sister? If a man and a woman can get married, then why can't a man marry more than one woman?

You see? Gay marriage brings no new slippery slopes to the table. None.

"Much of Gallagher’s argument relies on the fact that the complementary sexual and emotional drives of men and women produce much of the benefit of marriage."

You clearly aren't aware that there is far more diversity within the sexes than between the sexes. A man and a woman with the same (not complementary) emotional and/or sexual drives could get married. Of course it could happen! So they shouldn't get married because they won't get the benefits of marriage produced by complementary emotional and sexual drives?
For the record, my girlfriend and I have very complementary emotional and sexual drives. Just because we're girls doesn't mean we have the same drives. In fact, the person who I think is the most similar to myself, emotionally, is a man.

We don't deserve a shot because some surveys show homosexuals to be more promiscuous? What if there is a certain age group of heterosexuals that is more likely to divorce or cheat? What if (not saying it's true) those under 30 have a much higher rate of these things? Don't let them marry? Make them wait till their 30? Don't give them a shot?
So, heterosexual couple gets divorced, but they were allowed to have a shot because they are straight.
Homosexual couple stays together their whole life, but was never allowed to marry because of some people who have the same orientation as them?

and please do direct me to some studies showing high homosexual promiscuity rates. The only one I've seen had samples taken from men at bars/clubs/sex clubs. If you surveyed heterosexuals from the same sample groups, who'd get high promiscuity rates too!

Actually, OSM couples aren't denying you anything as you suggest. Take some responsbility for your own actions and realize that maybe, just maybe they have something to do with why you can't "marry."

I completely understand the fears that allowing same-sex marriage would force homosexuality to be come more socially acceptable, that allowing it would make any individual rejection of its validity more difficult... I do not believe your religious opinions are invalid -- not at all! I believe you have every right to believe what you do... I just think it is tremendously unfair that your opinion on the matter may prevent me, personally, from getting married in my lifetime. You can reject my relationship's validity as much as you want... But to deny me the ceremony and the cake and the guests and the bouquet being thrown and the rings and the photo albums and the smiling friends and family and the vows... that's too much to steal from me, when I want nothing whatsoever from you

Small hole? SSM is the result of the breakdown of the family unit as put forth by God (gasp) in creation. No doubt, adultery and divorce have added to that breakdown (among others); I am not say they have not. What I am cleary saying is that SSM is the embodiment of that breakdown in totality and its entirety.

To your question as to what I am doing to fight against adultery and divorce. Primarily, by honoring the commitment I made to both God and my wife. By submitting myself to God's rule in my life. By leading by example. By raising our daughter in the "fear and admonition of the Lord." By standing for Truth and Righteousness.