Brenda you're ignorant. Your comments reek of homophobia and hate.

Because it would recognize their particular relationship over and against that of the rest of the non-marital category. As has been stated ad nauseum by Chairm, Marty, Beetlebee, and others, what makes a SS relationship in need of special status that it be recognized by the gov't via a "marriage" license? Why is this so hard to understand?

"I observe this Father’s Day not just as a father grateful to be present in my daughters’ lives but also as a son who grew up without a father in my own life. My father left my family when I was 2 years old, and I knew him mainly from the letters he wrote and the stories my family told. And while I was lucky to have two wonderful grandparents who poured everything they had into helping my mother raise my sister and me, I still felt the weight of his absence throughout my childhood.

As an adult, working as a community organizer and later as a legislator, I would often walk through the streets of Chicago’s South Side and see boys marked by that same absence—boys without supervision or direction or anyone to help them as they struggled to grow into men. I identified with their frustration and disengagement—with their sense of having been let down.

In many ways, I came to understand the importance of fatherhood through its absence—both in my life and in the lives of others. I came to understand that the hole a man leaves when he abandons his responsibility to his children is one that no government can fill."

Clearly, his father's abandonment was a tragedy.

Maybe you’re just being snarky but no one rejects the role of someone’s father in their lives, or their mother. But to insist that children can’t be happy and well-adjusted without one of the other is simply false. There are many faulty dual-gender parenting situations; one male and one female does not automatically create good parents.

And no one forces widowed parents to remarry, or voluntarily single parents to marry. And outlawing same-sex marriage doesn’t even stop same-sex couples from raising children together. It just makes those children less secure, for reasons fully documented by NOM’s own Maggie Gallagher.

It’s a strawman argument and I’m glad you guys keep arguing it. It’s so unconvincing that people on the fence on this issue are more likely to support same-sex marriage in order to create a more stable environment for children being raised by same-sex couples.

Your assessment of who we are as humans leaves me to wonder if we have any recourse at all? On one hand, you state that "Some people like tomatoes; I can’t stand them. It’s beyond anybody’s control." Yet, you go onto say that you occasionally eat them because they are so healthy. That being the case, I didn't think you had any say (control) over the liking/eating of tomatoes. So which is it?

Are you a male heterosexual? Do you therefore hate men? Sexual attraction is merely a specific kind of human appetite, like food. Some people like tomatoes; I can’t stand them. It’s beyond anybody’s control. Do I hate people who like tomatoes? Nope, not at all. Sometimes I even make myself eat them, because they’re so healthy. I don’t think lesbians hate men. Many lesbians have fathers and brothers, male colleagues and friends. Sexual orientation doesn’t dictate your interpersonal relationships.

Do you think it’s good for kids to be raised by a dad who’s in prison, and a mom who works as a prostitute? Well, it’s perfectly legal. To reduce good parenting to merely gender tells me you aren’t a parent. Take it from those of us who are, kids need nurturing and love, and good role models. My grandfather was a much stronger influence on me than my father. I may as well have had two lesbians for moms, and my granddad as the “necessary” male influence.

So you think it's better for a kid to be raised without his father, if his mom hates men. You think this is a "better environment" than expecting her to respect that it takes both and exactly one man and one woman to create a child. That's twisted my friend. Apalling, and utterly derranged.

Wrong. Men and women are NOT equal under the eyes of the law. Until and unless they are, you don't have an "equality" argument and will have to find another avenue. Next?

Yes, men and women are legally equal. Not sure if there’s a point there but I’ve never been afraid to state the obvious.

No one said there’s no difference. There’s a difference between a 20 year old female and a 75 year old female, not the least of which is fertility, and they can both still get married.

“we have a tiny minority of people who are insisting on forcing their radical ideals upon the rest of society, and society is rejecting it as strongly as possible.”

Tiny minority? As close as the vote was in California and as close as it’s going to be in Maine, you want to call those of us who support marriage equality and an end to marriage discrimination a “tiny minority”?

“Gay men and lesbian women can and do marry, in every state in this country, practically every single day. One man, one woman, without regard to race, religion, or sexual orientation. It’s a wonderful thing isn’t it?”

It would be even better is for gay people to marry someone they want to marry, just like straight people get to. That way, we’d respect our Constitution, have fewer divorces and create better parenting environments for our nation’s children. You care about kids, don’t you?

And the People of 30 states have risen up and said "Now wait a minute!" Surely you can see what's happening here: we have a tiny minority of people who are insisting on forcing their radical ideals upon the rest of society, and society is rejecting it as strongly as possible.

If, as you and these 3 state courts claim, "marriage is a fundamental right", then you might expect there to be a law somewhere, anywhere, prohibiting gay people from marrying. But it's just not there. Gay men and lesbian women can and do marry, in every state in this country, practically every single day. One man, one woman, without regard to race, religion, or sexual orientation. It's a wonderful thing isn't it?

Because if there really is no difference between men and women, then you and I have no argument. But if there IS a difference, then it's absurd to think that separate could ever be equal. Two men either can or cannot equal two women. Which is it?

PS: "gayness" has nothing to do with it, as I'm sure you've noticed. No one cares, no one asks, and there is no "sexual orientation" test to pass. The question is, does sex matter?