The reader comments focus on the issue of marriage and religion, however, it appears the issue is lost on them. The bible says many things that are observed, or ignored, in today's society. The issue at hand is the over 1500 rights that our government (both federal and state) have chosen to provide to those that are married. The bible does not call for these rights to be provided to married couples, but I'm certain they enjoy them and take them for granted.Marriage Equality is about discontinuing unfair taxation and discrimination toward a particular minority group. The general public cannot be provided a free ride to vote on ANY minority groups individual rights. Prop 8 creates an alarming situation, that should concern others that do not fit into the majority's whims. .

I think Prop 8 originally passed because people were getting too caught up with religious beliefs and how marriage is affected by those beliefs. Prop 8 had nothing to do with religious beliefs; in fact, having Prop 8 written into law puts religion into the constitution. Maybe not in exact words, but the beliefs behind it are there.Marriage has been around since a lot longer than organized religion and Christianity. Marriage is not exclusive to religion. We are all human beings sharing the same planet; we are all part of the human race, we should not be separated by any belief system when it comes to wanting to share your life with someone you love. 50 years ago it was illegal for a Black person to marry a White person, has society not come far enough? Must we really restrict a man from marrying a man or woman from marrying a woman?I love my husband, and we have all the legal rights of being married. We also are recognized as being husband and wife by all our friends and family. We happened to have our first son right before getting married, and remember the red-tape we had to go through at the hospital. His insurance company did nothing for me, but would cover our son. The admitting nurse was nice enough to list my husband as my husband on the records so in the event of anything happening, he could make the decisions. I was more than happy with this decision because I already knew I would be spending the rest of my life with him. We have not had an easy marriage, he has had a number of medical problems and is now on disability. If we weren't legally married, all the financial and legal support I've given him (by representing him to hospitals, doctors, and insurance companies) would have been unrecognized.I fully support any human who wants the civil right to marry another human. It's not like their asking us to recognize anything less. I know some homosexual relationships that last longer, and have less infidelity, than some heterosexual relationships.I'd like to quote the dictionary (Merriam-Webster.com):"Main Entry: mar·riagePronunciation: \'mer-ij, 'ma-rijFunction: nounEtymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marryDate: 14th century1 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 marriage2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected ; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities3: an intimate or close union "I believe that those opposed to same-sex marriage are too close-minded and too wrapped up in their own beliefs; let go of the hate, let go of the discrimination, let go of the tension. I will sign-off with one last thought: How, on Earth, can any same-sex marriage impact your life so severely that you have to oppose it? And might I also add, that the only people impacted by same-sex marriages are same-sex couples, that's it! There's nothing else to read into it, there's no other group negatively affected, there's no religious organization that will be changed. Only same-sex couples are feeling the affect of Prop 8, give them the right to marry whom they love.I hope that the next time something like this comes up on a ballot society has grown and become more educated about the truth (instead of being force fed and believing lies and persuasions) to allow all same-sex couples the same civil rights as opposite-sex couples..

According to JP Beauchamp..."There is no instruction anywhere from God for a man to marry more than one woman."... Thank You. That is a good news, being happily divorced from an angel, I can only imagine in the worst nightmare the joys of being married to few women at once. Set this grace aside, all the other news from JP are pretty sad. According to the Bible, men and women are not equal, so that goes out the window also. The millions of people who never heard of the Bible are condemned to burn in Hell, and everybody will be punished at the Lord's day.Not only this idea somehow doesn't allow God to be an expression of Love. JP forgets to mention that Bible was written by the masters of institution which has been taxing, abusing, torturing and killing people for generations. It may take some fait to believe in his concept of angry God. The history is however a simple records of events. The record of horrifying crimes committed by Catholic Church fanatics for centuries in Europe. If that is the method to sell us naive nonsense picked out of abusers textbook, lets try something else.I'd like to try a story about God of love , who loves all the people equally, despite of their foolish actions and because He is a LOVE. And equal people have equal rights to make their own choices in life, and expressing their love the way they understand love.How sad California decided to turn around and go back in the times of darkness..... .

The topic of "marriage equality" arises out of a clause in the Fourteenth Amendment: "equal protection under the law." The way that works is as follows (as defined below by the Law.com Legal Dictionary): The right of all persons to have the same access to the law and courts and to be treated equally by the law and courts, both in procedures and in the substance of the law. It is akin to the right to due process of law, but in particular applies to equal treatment as an element of fundamental fairness. The most famous case on the subject is Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) in which Chief Justice Earl Warren, for a unanimous Supreme Court, ruled that "separate but equal" educational facilities for blacks were inherently unequal and unconstitutional since the segregated school system did not give all students equal rights under the law. It will also apply to other inequalities such as differentials in pay for the same work or unequal taxation. The principle is stated in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution: "No State shall…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" (http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=equal+protection&type=3&submit1.x=66&submit1.y=14). Accordingly, until now, all citizens were requrired to live equally under and adhere to the same laws regarding marriage, i.e., that marriage is defined as the union of one man and one woman. There is no discrimination under this law, because it is applied evenly to all. According to the Fourteenth Amendment, to require or allow anything otherwise would clearly be discrimination. We cannot have two conflicting laws or interpretations of the same law. Only now, under the rule of certain activist judges, do we have a similar situation that the Supreme Court unanimously declared unconstitutional in 1954, where we are creating "separate but equal" categories of marriage in some states. This error allows some citizens to live under a different legal scenario, violating the Fourteenth Amendment, and thus is unconstitutional on its face. The California Supreme Court saw the light and ruled correctly. Now, all lawmakers need to rethink this process of revision, before we completely destroy the Constitution and the rule of law in this Nation. Just wanting something to be so doesn't not entitle a few to a separate and unequal status under the law..

When you think about it, "gay marriage" is composed of two mutually exclusive terms.Gay is a misnomer for homosexual...truly there is nothing gay about being that way.Marriage is a sacred institution designed by God and not inclusive of same-sex couples. As the Scriptures show in Genesis 2:24: Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (For the sake of clarity, the word "wife" is never a reference to another man.)The confusion engendered by those who refuse to recognize the will of their maker in no way invalidates His intent for marriage. Any so-called marriage that falls outside of those parameters breeds strife and confusion.*As this concept does not settle with those espousing "gay marriage" it becomes necessary for them to cast aspersion on God, the Bible, and any of those who would choose to believe it. As such, the Bible becomes "hate speech," and those who choose to love God by adopting its values are labled "haters."Yet none of this changes His will. And for those wondering what that is: The Word of God is the Will of God. (The two are inseparable.)Being that we live in a society that, for the most part, refuses to recognize the soverignty of God, (What the Scripture calls, Man's Day, where man does the judging) there will be all manner of perversions to His original design for marriage. This will not be fully rectified until a future time (called the Lord's day).So, the debates, the rhetoric, the divisiveness, the politicism, the legalities, the elections may continue, but none of it will change the intent of the One who designed marriage.* note:(Polygamy and other forms of marriage apart from one man and one woman also fall outside the original intent of this institution. The fact that there were men in the Bible that had more than one wife does not in any way mean God validated this practice which became part of their culture. There is no instruction anywhere from God for a man to marry more than one woman.) .

I'd like to see us not allow our opposition to drive our discussions, speeches about same sex marriage. We desire it because it's equality among the law. PERIOD. Lets not fall into "the bible didn't tell men to have multiple wives, etc." That's a lower level of thinking and debating. And we already know we function way higher than that. It's not necessary to compare our reasons to theirs by discounting what they say or do as it relates to the BIBLE or anything else for that matter. THose idiots who are against it don't even DESERVE that kind of energy and to occupy that kind of space in our psyhe. They don't DESERVE the breath with take to even utter those kinds of fight back statements. Lets use our own minds, knowledge, to state our reasons for desiring what we desires without pointing out what they do that's not relative to the bible. The bottom line is we want equality in the eyes of the LAW. Attempting to show what heterosexuals do or don't do thats not in line with the Bible or any other moral act is almost as neanderthal and cave man as eating without utensils. Tit for tat is simply used to draw out emotion and it's an attempt to get someone to backdown in arguments based on emotion, not the issue. Developmental psychologist have said it's the LOWEST form of debate and if compared to civilization, it would be compared to cave man times.Thank you for listening. I'm personally sick of seeing the world debate an issue that way, and I'm a firm believer that our population is WAY above that. Say nothing and it upsets your opponent even more, since you want to draw out emotion. The message sent, "what another person has said isn't worth the air to take a breath and address it. It is worth the firing of various neurons, electrons in the brain to create thought process around whatever they said. Please, for me, lets stop doing that. Ignorance and incompetence is all around us. Let not add to it. And when you get 43 like me, and you see the status and situation the world is in, you pray, Lord get me out of here. Retire me to my demise. I won't take my life, but I'm begging you to get me out of here amongst these IDIOTS in the world. And within time, trust me, he'll do it. There are so many idiots and some greater in various parts of the country than other. I live in Georgia with a population of 9 million. I'm willing to bet that there are 8,999,999 million IDIOTS in Georgia.!!!.

Why are the Christian Terrorists who support Prop 8 afraid of? Is the man/woman union so fragile that it can not survive an alternative partner union? If it is so fragile, I say, GET RID OF IT!!!!!Someone said since there are no "civil rules" for other unions or "rites of passage" why are there such rules for marriage?There are no civil rules for baptisms, first communions, bar mitzvah, brit milah, etc. However, there is a movement to stop open air creamations (Hindu) in Great Britian. Perhaps the other rites of passages are not far behind the attacks of the Christian Terrorists..

We live in a very diverse society with different views and a political process that allows for everyone's voice to be heard. As a African-American man I don't see the Gay marriage issue as the same civil rights issue as what has happened to Black Americans in this country. This issue of Gay marriage is not about religious rights being imposed on a select minority group. We live in a separate religion and state society. Each side has their own values view of how they see the world and that is at heart of the disagreement..

You already have equal rights.M. Clark said, "The bottom line is we want equality in the eyes of the LAW."I say again, you already have equality in the eyes of the law. You have the right, just as I do, to marry a person of the opposite sex. That's equal rights.What you want is ADDITIONAL rights under the law.I've always said, "Ask the question that you want answered" (e.g., if you want to know what time it is, ask "What time is it?" rather than "Do you have the time?" In speaking to those who desire to legalize "same-sex marriage," I have learned that they are seeking the rights and privileges of married couples.You are much more likely to prevail.I believe what you focus on, is not obtaining the additional right to marry a person of the same sex, but to apply the rights and privileges you seek to civil unions, such as prison and hospital visitation rights, control over an incapacitated partner's affairs; joint insurance policies automatic inheritance and right of survivorship; joint filing of tax returns and customs claims, domestic violence protection orders; etc.I've always said, "Ask the question that you want answered." In this case, be specific about what you want and ask for that. You are much more likely to prevail. This may sound like "separate but equal," and if it is, so what? These provisions are much easier to regulate than it was to make sure that the black toilet facilities were equal to the white ones. Besides, if you do not view this solution as adequate, consider viewing it as a stepping stone.My 2¢..

Dare I comment that the Equal Rights Amendment (for women), is still not part of the Constitution. There is still much work to be done..

The word "marriage" does indeed matter, Cleve. Separate is NOT equal in California. Here we have had all the rights and responsibilities of marriage as "domestic partners" effective January 1, 2005. However, here in Butte County, my husband died at home in January 2008 - three years after the Domestic Partner law went into effect.The Deputy Sheriff acting as coroner refused to recognize me as next of kin. He and the sheriff/coroner had no idea what a "domestic partner" was. Lt. Dennis Cooley who is paid over $70,000 just to keep up with coroner laws and regulations had no idea that "domestic partners" were next of kin when one died.Had my husband and I been "married" there would not have been a question ... and I would not have faced the nightmare of not being able to decide on my husband's funeral home ... and having to lie to keep my property in my own home and having to provide false information to a deputy in order to avoid having my own home taped off and made unavailable to me.Separate is NOT equal and the word "marriage" does matter. Now that he has died, if we were married I would have the respect in society of being a "widower." Now I am just the "survivor of a domestic partnership." Has a nice ring, doesn't it? Not! I have lived thru this separate but NOT equal rights and responsibility, Mr. Jones. Separate is NOT equal and the word "marriage" matters a GREAT deal. It is about more than money ... it is about human dignity ... and not having to call your brother in law in New York State to decide on a funeral home. I am still so angry about that humiliation ... so angry. .

This debate must get back to the issue that marriage is a religous ceremony. Churches, your faith / my faith have every right not to "marry" two people of the same sex.The State has no right in saying who we should commit our love and lift to. We fall in love and make a committment based on the soul, the personality, the charcter, "love", and compatibility we have with someone. I think it would do more to prompt the cause to simply bring the debate back to equal rights for everyone one to find a partner / relationship / comittment and question (or change) why the state will not honor that union... many non-religous people get "married" without a cermony, and the government honors that. They should do the same for all two-people that want to make that committmetn. .

VM, your two cents worth is not worth even that much. Your argument that we already have "equal rights" under the law is such a cop-out. According to your way of thinking, I guess African-Americans and the women of this nation should have never fought for their equal rights either. Since you figured this all out, they had their rights already, correct?? Not hardly!!! .

Really, all I have to say is that Richard Steward lived through it and therefore by default has the most thought provoking argument of all.Thanks for sharing your story. .