I’m sorry Mr Perkins but I have to disagree with you. I don’t see how 2 people that love each and want to spend their lives together hurts “natural” marriages. No one’s marriage is anyone’s business, except their own. People can choose to focus on their own lives and that of their family or they can choose to focus on other people’s lives and judge them.

No one is without sin in this world and until we are maybe we need to stop judging others and leave that up to God.

Mr Perkins,

Lets get a few things straight (no pun intended). The Kern County Clerk’s marriage ceremony program was vastly successful. So successful, in fact, that in fiscal 2007, 44% of all marriage ceremonies that occurred in Kern County occurred at the Clerk’s Office.

Ann Barnett has consistently asserted (although almost no one believes her) that her decision has nothing to do with religion, but was motivated by financial, space and security concerns. The problem with this story is the fact that she did not discuss any of these matters with other County officers. Before making such and important decision, good faith required that Barnett discuss space and security concerns with the County Administrative Officer (who manages the building the Clerk’s Office is located in) in order to see what could be worked out. She did not do so, the first time the County Administrative Officer knew that Barnett was claiming there was a problem was when he read her press release cancelling the program. Similarly, Barnett did not discuss any financial problems with the Board of Supervisors (which funds her office) prior to cancelling the program. In Kern County it is unheard of for any official to cancel a major program withough discussing the matter with the Board of Supervisors. In addition, in her last annual report to the Board, Barnett claimed that the marriage program made money.

So, if Barnett based her decision on her religious beliefs, then she is a liar. If she did it for administrative reasons, as she claims, you just wasted a column.

Massachusetts hasn’t spiraled into “social chaos” or “wreaked havoc” on the rest of the country yet. In fact, it has one of the lowest divorce rates in the country.

So much for your hateful fearmongering, Mr. Perkins.

How does gay marriage “wreak havoc” on America? How does two adults loving each other and wanting to take care of one another harm anyone?

If you are so concerned about families and children, why don’t you focus your energy on battered wives, abused and neglected children, or families living in poverty?

Do you realize how stupid is sounds to try to make an issue of this when there are so many other IMPORTANT things going on.

Gay marriage is not a sexual issue it is a civil rights issue. I can’t understand how, in America, a segment of the population is still denied their rights and have to live in the shadows.

Get a life, Mr. Perkins.

Please explain to me how two consenting adults wanting to officially proclaim their love is an attack on marriage. If you truly want to defend marriages, Mr. Perkins, your time might be better spent focusing on the reasons why people get divorced.

In any regards, the fact of the matter is your side has already lost. The tide is turning and there’s nothing you can do to change it back. Like interracial marriage before it, in the coming years gay marriage will be legal and the majority of the country will be wondering what all the fuss was in the first place.

Hmm…I thought God loved all His kids and wanted their happiness. Apparently the religious right once again know more than God. Someone please share the memo with Him.

It’s between the couple that wants to get married!

Mr. Perkins, I completely disagree with you. I am a gay teenager in high school and am constantly getting made fun of and bastardized for my sexual orientation. People seem to think that my orientation threatens who they are or what there future will become. I fail to understand how my marriage, whether it be with a male or female, has any effect on how you live. And I know that this is a repetititous point, but I am still quite shocked by your point of view. And as it is stated by CNN’s Hilary Rosen, “This is not a nation that tolerates intolerance anymore.” Hopefully this means that your future, closed minded thoughts will be ignored and disregarded.

Mr. Perkins

I think you over exaggerate - I don’t see how 2 people who love each other being together undermine the marriage of other people or do a disservice to children. In the work place we are taught to respect diversity - we should be respectful of diversity outside the work place as well.

Annie Kate
Birmingham AL

Mr. Perkins-

Hm…I need you to explain something to me here…you wrote “Thanks to the courage of County Clerks Ann Barnett and Candace Grubbs, the local offices will stop performing wedding ceremonies altogether.” Now, that seems like a fine statement..however, there’s one word that’s used, i feel, incorrectly. Now, maybe i’m just picking on semantics here, buuut i think you actually meant “thanks to the [i]cowardice[/i] of Ann Barnett and Candace Grubbs…” not courage.

You see, it’s courageous for the Supreme Court to pass a bill and willingly face the “wrath of god” in order to grant happiness to hundreds of homosexuals, it’s courageous for gay men and women to come out and get married, despite the hate they have to endure from people like you, it is FAR from courageous to try and belittle those efforts taken by the government to ensure happiness for all in our society, whether by having a blatant disregard for the law and refusing to practice it as it’s written, OR by writing an article extolling those who refuse to practice while simultaneously mocking the courage of the supreme court.

Oh, another thing, “We applaud the brave men and women in California who are risking their jobs and safety to rebuff this coordinated attack on marriage.” About that…I find this to be strange…see…the only person I see attacking marriage here is you, and those who’ve been brainwashed by people like you, and I assume you can’t POSSIBLY mean your pals Anne and Candace when you say “brave men and women” becuase, well, as we’ve already discussed….disparaging real bravery is nothing but shameful cowardice.

I don’t want you to think I disagree with the entire article, though. The part where you say “The Republican leadership and presidential candidates could stand to learn a thing or two from these local statesmen” I completely, 100% agree with. These local statesmen can certainly teach our presidential candidates something. They are teaching them what NOT to do in order to become president. Wonderful observation there, Mr. Perkins.

Why can heritage houses be legally protected, and native rights preserved; but straights cannot keep the tradition of their institution? If I was gay, I would care less about being ‘married’. Heck, I would even consider it a sign of latent heterosexuality.
Live how you want, but don’t steal another groups sacrament. Gays are generally very creative, why can’t they ‘invent’ something like ‘life bond’ or ’soul mates’?
What’s up with all this gay pride? I guess all along it has been just the opposite, can’t be married. wahhh

Time to come out of the closet, Tony perkins! It’s usually the ones hating on something the most who are trying to hide their own association with which they hate.

Look at the republican party in general - they have the same views on gay marriage as you, yet look at the number of them who have to resort to unsafe, illicit trysts because they want to be with someone they’re attracted to but they feel the need to not “be found out”.

When you decide to look inward and accept your own feelings you won’t be so hateful towards these loving couples and you hopefully also won’t be so ashamed of your attractions

Wow!!! What a cool update!! Is like is high-tech all over again! pretty cool guys, pretty cool….

And as for the gay marriage, I mean, is California! California is crazy!! I’m not gonna lie but I don’t know if I’m ready for legalizing gay marriage here in the states. I don’t know guys, is crazy you could say. I will respect their decision but overall, I don’t know what to think, I don’t know what to think……only time will tell.

If two people who love each other enough to want to proclaim it to the world and where they pledge to spend the rest of their lives together… that is something to CELEBRATE, not condemn.

Just because someone may be different from you, sir, doesn’t make them evil. Just because someone may or may not be attracted to the same sex as you, doesn’t automatically make them a ‘threat’.

Who are you to say who can and cannot marry? Who are you to make unjust accusations about your fellow man? Our own Declaration of Independence says “we hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal”….not all STRAIGHT men. ALL men, sir.

Gay people are no less human than you. They bleed, they love, they laugh, they are NO DIFFERENT. How dare you accuse them otherwise! It is people like you — who have the same small-minded, ignorant views — that are contributing to the chaos that our world is today. It’s not “homosexuality”…it’s the persecution of it.

Think about that and consider how ‘righteous’ you truly are.

Can you just imagine what this is going to do to all the genealogists out there? Thought that Plutoid was gonna wreak havoc with textbooks and dvds on astronomy; wait til you get genealogists trying to work on family trees:)

Does Anderson Cooper back this opinion? I am shocked. Gay couples marrying is no threat to marriage. Straight marriages will continue. There are a lot of reasons why people get divorced and why the divorce rate is so high and none of them have to do with gay marriages. It’s ridiculous. It’s a narrow minded view of marriage, based on some Christian beliefs, that marriage should be between a man and a woman. I’m a Christian, and I do not agree. Why not expand the definition? Straight marriage will still continue, failing at the same rate it has been.

As someone who has been married to the same woman for over 25 years, I would like to add my comment to this issue. Being with the one you love is the most important aspect of our very short lives. My wife has endured breast cancer and a brain tumor, so we both know this fact very well. We BOTH support, with all our hearts, the decision of California to sanction the union of couples in marriage - ANY COUPLES; be they man and woman, man and man, or woman and woman. It is time to end the discrimination against gays and lesbians. Gays and lesbians are members of our families; they are our brothers, our sisters, our sons, and our daughters. Their love is as important, as honorable, as sacred as is the traditionally accepted love of a man and a woman.

Nonsensical drivel, as usual. You’ve lost Mr. Perkins, move on.

Upon hearing that at 1701 hrs on 16 June 2008 gay marriages were legalized in California, my mind was filled with disgust. Aside from the radical liberal polices already in place in California, this blatant attack on the definition of marriage is unwarranted. First of all, the highly infiltrated radical courts of California are not the place to decide an issue such as this. As I recall, voters soundly rejected redefining the definition of marriage a couple of years ago. Why are the courts trying to change things? I’m sure when we have the vote on this issue later this year, the voters of California will again reject the ludicrous practice of Gay Marriage.
Stacy, stop changing the subject from Gay Marriage to why people get divorced.
C, California, what does families living in poverty have to do with Gay Marriage?
Claire, you have a point, but you must keep in mind that through democratic practice, Californians already voted on this issue and rejected Gay Marriage. Gays and their counterparts SHOULD live in the shadows becausa their practices are against Natural Law. I’m not talking about against the Bible, the Constitution of California, or common sense. I am talking about why males are males, why females are females. Gay Marriage is one step in the wrong direction. Humans re-create, and Nature intended opposing sexes to be together to support this. Two of the same sex in an official relationship such as a marriage serves no purpose other than to mock the morals that have been around since the beginning of time. I love a lot of people, even males! This does not mean I am going to marry them! I think Gays misinterpret their relationships with same sex counterparts. They are just good friends, and should leave it at that.
If people want to be Gay together, they need to do it behind closed doors because no one wants to see such disgusting, immoral behavior on our streets. Closed doors will not really help though, because God sees everything. Some sins are forgivable, others are not. Keep this in mind.
On a conclusive note, I pledge to you all that I will fight this Court decision to my grave. This is one of the most disturbing events in California since the 1989 Assault Weapons Ban. Does anyone see California growing more and more like a Socialist State?

This is a hilarious blog. “Where is the tolerance of intolerance?” As nonsensical an article I’ve ever read. What wonderful satire of the Conservative Right!

I’m getting married in MA this summer and I just want to say, knowing that my friends - gay and straight - can all marry whomever they want - makes my marriage mean all the much more, because I am not enjoying something exclusive to 9/10 of the population, but something universally available in my state. I am so happy that California has also decided to eliminate this form of discrimination, and hope that other states will soon follow suit!

Kids do best with two parents who love them and love each other. Period.

i find it laughable, and amazingly hypocritical that, while the right wing has spent so much time and effort fighting against perceived affronts to the sanctity of marriage, numerous members of the republican party are having affairs with their pages, divorcing their wives, sending pornography to pages. wasn’t it jesus who said, “why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye, and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye.” if you people are truly interested in preserving the sanctity of marriage, let me see you fight to outlaw divorce itself. admit it, it has nothing to do with the sanctity of marriage. it’s all about your homophobia.

What’s more important? A civil servant’s religious rights or my religious rights? My religious beliefs do not condemn homosexuality nor same-sex marriage. If a civil servant doesn’t approve of same-sex marriage then she shouldn’t marry another woman.

A civil servant’s refusal to marry same-sex couples is completely irrelevant in any case. Marriage is a CIVIL ceremony. You can get married in a church, but it’s not legal without the marriage license from the state.

The state - including a headstrong, bigoted civil servant - has no business imposing religious views on anyone.

You do not protect your rights and freedoms, by denying them to others.

I do not see anything that will harm me, my family, my grandchildren in
Gay marriages.

And I still will beleive in God, just as much as Mr. Perkins….I’m just not as much of a loud-mouth or show-off about it.

I commend both Ann Barnett and Candace Grubbs for their integrity. I’m find comfort that they are trying to do what is right, even if the new law making branch of the government (the supreme court) has made new laws. I thank them and others like them for their courage dispite the bigots who clamor for tolerance but deny other for thier beliefs.

I think same sex marriage is wonderful, although I don’t want any part of it, there is too many people in the world now. What a great way to stop this crisis.

Jay

I am a born and raised Christian woman and married to a man, but that just happens to be my choice. I feel every adult deserves to marry the person they love. I don’t feel this is an attack on my marriage in any way. I don’t feel this hurts anyone and they should be allowed to marry and celebrate just like I did with my family. I would not take that away from anyone. We need to move forward.

Thank you for your excellent article. God bless you for writing it.

Soon the tide will turn as people realize the truth because of a sovereign move of God that will be so strong that nothing will be able stop it. The foundations of righteousness will be restored in this nation. Then multitudes of broken, hurting people will know God’s love and honor Him again and turn from their wicked ways.

In the mean time, may God help these tragically deceived people for whom Jesus died and to whom he offers full and free forgiveness for every sin if they will only turn to Him and humbly repent.

Classic marraige is between a man and a women.If same sex people want to have a legal bond, please just call it something else!

What bothers me is that the Supreme Court, in one magnanimous move, put aside the will of the people and forced gay marriage upon them. I don’t really care one way or another whether gays marry, but I am deeply bothered by the thought that the judiciary can impose its own laws, in direct contradiction to the will of the people of California.

The decision of two adults, regardless of gender, to enter into marriage is their business and has nothing to do with me or my family (unless we’re invited to the wedding). I believe that 50 years ago or so similar editorials about racially mixed marriages were common (it’s not God’s law!) and amazingly the earth did not stop turning after Loving vs. Virginia.
I have better things to worry about than two men or two women arguing over whose turn it is to pick up the dry cleaning or how to spend the stimulus check. Mr. Perkins might have better things to worry about as well, but maybe he’s avoiding them.

Amen, Mr. Perkins. I am grateful to see someone standing up for what is best for families and best for our society. Keep up the good work.

I can’t believe you are making this front page news.

Really disappointed in CNN to see this story of two older lesbians getting married as the lead story for this evening.

What is the process for determing what gets the front page? I kept coming to CNN to see the latest on the flood in the Midwest, and the fighting in Afghanistan. But no, this is the top news.

We will ever be able to get over this issue and move on? C’mon. As far as gay marriage is concerned, as long as they don’t make it mandatory, who cares??

What’s happening to Ann Barnett is just horrible…although it pales in comparison to what homosexuals have endured for generations. I pray that she’s not further inconvenienced.

With the majority of marriages now ending in divorce, same-sex marriages could hardly do much harm to the institution–and indeed may very well redeem it. Having been denied marriage for so long, one would hope that they cherish it more than so many hetrosexuals have.

Instead of fighting to deny marriages to loving couples, Mr. Perkins, your time would be better spent working to reduce divorces and keeping fathers engaged with their children post-divorce.

If Mr Perkins spent the same amount of time trying to block equal civil rights for gay and lesbian people on more serious family issues such as the current divorce rate among heterosexual couples, the plight of single parent homes, deadbeat dads, etc. Some of these gay couples who have lived in loving families for decades may be able to assist Mr Perkins with working toward solutions for real family problems. Lets focus on what we have in common, not what keeps us at odds with one another. Don’t be afraid of us Tony. We care about you too!

Mr. Perkins,

No one is asking to marry you. Isn’t marriage essentially between two people, and then their child(ren) should they choose to raise any? Do you intrude on all your neighbors’ personal decisions? In the United States of America?

Unless you see abuse, get over it. How can you be so arrogant that you believe other, law abiding citizens cannot choose with whom to raise children, who will get to make life decisions in case of accident or illness, who will inherit, indeed, who will scratch the place on our backs we can’t itch? Just as the miscegenation bigotry was eradicated, soon, this too will be gone.

Please think more carefully before condemning others to a lesser status. We are all human, born with inalienable rights. This is not a tiered society, my religion is not yours to choose, yours is not mine. As you are legally barred from dictating to me, I am barred from dictating to you. Enjoy your choices, accept the others.

With all due respect Mr. Perkins, anyone who is this dedicated to stopping marriage between to consenting adult homosexuals, is a closet homosexual themselves. We have seen this time and time again, especially in the republican party. The rest of us are just concerned with our own marriages.

Embrace your homosexuality and give us all a break.

Here is a real fact that should just end this whole discussion about right and wrong:
homosexuals have the right to be just as miserable as heterosexual married couples, if they chose to be.
More than half of all marriages end in divorce Mr. Perkins, and as for those who stay married, we can’t honestly say they are all happy marriages, can we?
Yes, there are exceptions to that, as even a broken clock is right twice a day. However, it is interesting to point out that I hear of and know of many homosexual relationships that have lasted over 30 years….

Once a few of our gay and lesbians go throught the divorce process that american men go through, they will be wishing otherwise. I beleive that marriage should be completely abolished. People should be able to check in and check out of relationships as needed.

disgusting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tony — go back forty years and substitute “negro” for “gay” - you’re saming the same crap the opponents on inter-racial marriage said in 1968 when the US Supreme Court finally struck down the law against that. I heard you on CNN tonight say “only a small, vocal, minority of HOMOSEXUALS” support this “radical” change in the marriage law. Are you truly delusional, or just an incredible liar? I think the latter.

I agree with Mr. Perkins.
I support the clerks who refuse to perform “marriages” for same sex couples.
I pay taxes and have for 30 years, and I also vote according to the Judeo Christian principles upon which this country was established.

Marriage was created for man and woman, not for couples of the same sex. It is a union created by God, not by man. That is why our families are so disturbed, and you see so many weird things, crimes, murders, it is because the root of the family is being changed daily.

Mr Perkins, are you so insecure in your own marriage that just because two men who love each other are getting married, you feel threatened somehow??? Whatever happened to the first amendment, specifically the portion that states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. If this country professes the freedom of religion, then the freedom to not believe in Christianity should also be protected. If these couples wants to marry, they should have every right to do so. And if you are that concerned about immorality, maybe you should focus on Ted Haggard instead, your very own Christian Standard Bearer.

I am also looking forward to a Democratic Majority in both chambers of Congress and the first African American president. It’s time the Republicans are put in their place.

“Marriage: thus I name the will of the two to create the one that is more then those who created it. Reverence for one another, as those willing with such a will, is what I call marriage.” Friedrich Nietzsche. I also believe marriage is meant for man and woman and that the act of creation can not be broken regardless of what anyone wants to call marriage. But the poor religious version of what Perkins calls the sanctity of marriage was destroyed when divorce became an option, most definitely not with homosexual marriage. The individual well-being became more important than that of the marriage well-being. Right or wrong can only be decided by the individual situation. Such as mine, I was much better off not being raised around my father.

To allow gays to marry doesn’t weaken my or any version of marriage , but makes it stronger. I, like my Sioux forebears, see the gay person as one with two souls and a blessing to mankind. They further define who I am. Perhaps in the future marriage will further be defined much differently and deeply than Nietzsche thought. When two gay couples get together to have children.

Gay marriage: thus I name the will of the FOUR to create the one that is more than those who created it. Reverence for one another, as those willing with such a will, is what I call gay marriage. A better grasp of, taking a village to raise a child.

Just amazing. And not so long ago interracial marriage was outlawed as well. Blacks marrying whites! What havoc! Please. Instead of judging others expression of love, you and others like you should start exploring your continous expressions of hate.

I dont exactly see all of you self appointed “marriage saviors” standing outside courtrooms protesting straight couples from multiple divorces over their lifetimes. Isnt that ironic.

As I was reading the CNN.com news earlier today, I came across an article in which you reported that a man that was beating on a 1-2 year old boy, did not stop beating the boy until the man (killed by police fire) and boy (killed by the coward) were both dead. Tonight, I logged on to your website to see if there was any news on the occurance, which I felt is very worthy of news coverage, as I believe everyone should be made aware of the event and everyone should be in a state of outrage. Well, needless to say, I did not find any news concerning the dispicabel (sp) event. I did however, get to see a picture of a couple of old grey haired lesbians kissing each other in what appears to be california’s attempt at changing the world. Hey california, wake up, the man killing the kid with his bare hands happened in your state, figure out why he did it, before you waste your time on whether or not a boy should marry a boy and a girl a girl. Please understand that I, and a lot of people who feel the way I do, feel that, if like you say the rest of the nation will follow suite, will be there on the front lines of both my states (TX born and raised / Florida in the end) to let you know, that as always your plan will not succeed. I served my country for 22 years so that you can exercise your right to perpetuate your ideas and shred my constitution in the process, but I did not serve in vain and I believe in my governments ability to protect what I served for and disregard the san francisco mayor as . . . (I’m drawing a blank, as well as I should be). P.S. I did not capitalize california, san francisco, and mayor on purpose, as capitilzation is a sign of respect, of which I feel you are not worthy.

I agree with Mr. Perkins that this decision is detremental to the moral fabric of the nation, which is already stretched thin. This debate is most often cast as a rights issue and so I will respond in such a manner. For thousands of years marriage has been the fundamental unilateral building block of families and in turn cultures. For a group of openly practicing homosexuals to determine to so radically redefine what has been the fundamental building block of all human culture in order to validate their own lifestyle decisions is an arrogance of gargantuan proportion. Marriage has always referred to a unique relationship between people who are complementary to one another in both biology and personality that will serve to reproduce children, be held in honor and fidelity, and last for life. What we’ve witnessed is the determination of a few to hijack the institution of marriage from generations and civilizations that have submitted to marriage as a core of culture. Between this radical redefinition of marriage and the proliferation of no-fault divorce law, the institution of marriage is essentially being so watered down that it will soon be meaningless. The next step will be to legalize polygamy, at which point the institution of marriage will be destroyed - there will be absolutely no criteria left to marriage. As a white male, I would love to con some activist judge into redefining “whites” as a racial minority so that I can take advantage of affirmative action hiring policies and school admissions policies for my children, but that would be absurd. I can’t help but feel that is what we’ve witnessed today - the ridiculous redefinition of a societal and legal institution for the whim of a small minority.

I applaud his article and his views. As I posted on the alternative 360 view, many of you are missing the point. The Cal. Supreme court clearly went against the view of the people. A poster stated that the cause was lost and the tide was turning. Sorry but you are completely wrong. The 62% that voted this for this ban consitutes a majority in this country and in Nov. it will be determined thru a same sex ban on the Cal. constitution.

I live in a country were same sex marriage has been legal for 3 years, 5 in my province. This is a non issue. The sky hasn’t fallen, nor has it in other countries where this is law. It is the Family Research Council not the proponents of these unions that are encroaching on individual rights. The Family Research Council should really change its came to better reflect it’s mandate, how about ‘The Suppression of Individual Sexual Rights and Freedoms Council. They cannot produce one non-biblical argument or statistic to support their cause. SSM is not an attack on marriage. As a heterosexual married person I feel that in NO WAY is my marriage of less worth because gays can marry. Actually I now feel, that marriage, the institution that frames my relationship with my wife has been elevated as its no longer discriminatory. By being discriminatory marriage is an invalid institution akin to all whites social club.

“To comply with the law, Kern and Butte Counties will still issue marriage licenses, but they refuse to subject their staff to the Supreme Court’s blatant disregard for traditional morality and individual religious rights.”

What about the individual religious rights of those getting married? Not all religions say gay marriage is wrong. Marriage, in all 50 states, is not a religious issue for the governement — every single state defines marriage as a civil contract.

“Sound familiar? It should, since that’s exactly what the California Supreme Court did by disenfranchising more than four million voters who defined marriage as the union of a man and woman in 2000. In the end it is not about tolerance at all, it about forced acceptance.”

The courts did the same thing when miscegnation laws were ruled against. Rights are either rights or they are not — they should certainly never be up to majority rule. We wouldn’t even think of voting as defining marriage as only between persons of the same race — so why should we between those of the same sex? We can even legitemately debate whether or not it is a right, but *never* vote on it.

There’s a simple solution to all of this, really. If you don’t like gay marriage, then I suggest not marrying a gay person. But then again, that takes all the steam out of your sails, doesn’t it?

May God have mercy on America. God made Adam and Eve to be in a marriage, not Adam and Steve. That is so unnatural, just down right nasty. Even animals know their place and we’re suppose to be more intelligent. God’s wrath will be shown, because it’s just like in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah. And God didn’t tolerate the homosexual activities there either. He destroyed the entire city. Anyone with any kind of sense would know that it’s unnatural for two people with the same sex organs to engage in sexual relations. I just pray that God open the eyes of our justice system and not allow this. Marriage should be between a man and a woman.
Virginia Harris
NC

Why is the excuse of religious beliefs always used to impose restrictions on people who do not hold those same beliefs? The last I checked, we had separation of church and state, and therefore Government cannot deny marriage to two consenting adults based only on religious reasons.

Not so long ago, my own marriage would have been illegal. My husband and I are different races, and there was a time in this country we, too, would have been denied a marriage license.

Instead of running around trying to deny rights to people who don’t hold the same beliefs as you do, how about instead celebrating the fact that you live in a country that allows you to worship as you please and uphold those rights for everyone, not just the people who believe the same things you do.

Marriage has been between one man and one woman for thousands of years. How dare the liberals ‘redefine’ what God defined and created. That is the attack on marriage.

What’s next? The liberals will say it’s unfair to limit marriage to two people. It should be three. But why stop at three? How about four or five? And why not marry family members? How about animals?

Sure that sounds ridiculous, but two men or two women marrying each other probably would have sounded ridiculous to our founding fathers as well.

The liberals have flooded our media and schools with their plan, desensitizing us to their perverse ways. It’s just plain sick.

Thanks, liberals, for taking us one step closer to destroying this country. Everything is right in your own minds…there is no moral standard, therefore things will change at your will. The moral standard is whatever you say it is. I can’t imagine what the standard will be 20 years from now.

…do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

That’s one standard you will never rewrite (1 Cor 6:9&10).

Religious people are the biggest biggots in this country, beware of their hidden agenda, they are full of hate, beware of any church America, in the United States and everywhere, their agenda is not to further humanity’s well being and overal success, this Mr. Perkins as I can see dedicates his life to spreading the hatred to everybody, his opinion and everybody else like his should be banned…… and they should be put in jail for their intolerance.

We will win equal rights for GLBT people. Time is on our side. The leaders of the anti-gay forces are old. Younger evangelicals are making it quite plain that gay-bashing isn’t high on their agenda; and it’s starting to fail as a fund-raising ploy. May God grant long life and happiness to all those who will marry in the coming weeks and months.

Father Raymond
Superior (retired)
Community of the Resurrection
San Diego CA USA

I find many flaws in your ‘logic.’ First and foremost the fact that you think ‘natural marriage’ was an institution that straight people respect. With a divorce rate of 50%, with people like Britney Spears getting married one night in Vegas only to have it immediately annulled, with people being forced into marriage because of pregnancy or social pressures- ‘natural marriage’ is anything but…

Mr. Perkins, I have spent many years fighting an up-hill battle over something that seems so simple to me. Loving someone should never be viewed as wrong. When two consenting adults come together and express that love, nothing should stand in the way of that- least of all your close minded views of what love and/or marriage is. No one else has to gain approval for the person they love, there is not reason why I should.

I am a successful professional. I have 2 college degrees, own a home and a car, mow my lawn and pay my taxes. I have never been arrested, never used drugs, behaved like every other 20 something in my day- why should I be denied any of the rights you enjoy as an American. I have committed my life to the service of my fellow men, only to have them shun me for the man I love.

I’m not out to make history. I want to share my life and my love with the man in my life. Neither you, nor your religious beliefs can take that away from me.

I thank the millions of homosexuals who have paved the way for the freedoms I do have, and hope that generations of gays beyond me continue to gain more ground towards equality- because that is what we ALL deserve.

I completely agree with Mr. Perkins. The decision can and will wreak havoc on every state in America.

First, from a legal standpoint. The law in California is not like the one in Massachusetts. To have a gay marriage in Massachusetts you have to be a resident of that state and it will only be recognized there. The California law does not make that distinction. Therefore when an out-of-state gay couple gets married in California they are going to want to travel back to their home state and be recognized. And since most states do not allow that, there will be lawsuits in every state challenging the current marriage laws. That WILL wreak havoc on every state in America. And that is exactly what the pro-gay activists want.

Second, it does wreak havoc on state in America morally. This effect is not overnight but takes many years to really bear to fruition. Many are calling gay marriage “progress.” I guess I can agree with that statement because the progress we are having in America is decay and decay is a natural type of “progress.” It’s interesting, as I have been reading the responses above, many are like, “if two people love eachother what’s the big deal?” I guess if keep our head in the sewer long enough we eventually forget that it stinks. Today it’s gay marriage (which most of the readers above don’t think is a big deal); in 10 years it will be polygamy (or before); and after that it will just continue to get worse. So buckle your seatbelts America as we slowly, day-by-day, drift out farther in a sea of moral depravity.

If love is the only condition for marriage we’ve got problems. What if I love 3 people and we all want to be married to each other? What if I want to marry my sister or brother or even my parent? A social taboo it may be in 2008 but give it a few years. Laugh at me now but mark my word it’s coming. How can a court rule against these marriages in light of the setting of this same-sex marriage precedent.

Also, for those who equate same sex marriage with interracial marriage, big difference! A person’s race has nothing to do with choice. I was born a black man. I had no say in the matter. Homosexuality on the other hand is a choice. Think about it. If it were biological in nature it would be dependent in some way upon heredity. This would mean homosexuality would be on the decrease not the increase because reproduction is obviously an issue for homosexuals.

Seems to me like much to do about nothing. We have tax paying citizens paying an extra tax to become joined in marriage. We’ve got to pay for King Bush’s WAR in Irag ! We’ve got to pay for higher gas prices, and we’ve got to pay for higher food. Aren’t we suppose to be a community? Aren’t we suppose to be on the same side of the borders? Shouldn’t we say we where there when at least a freedom (something we hold DEARLY) was given to CHOOSE !

Yet again, those that deem that “traditional morality” something of a positive force for today miss the point, and make a lot of bad arguments along the way.

For one thing, a Supreme Court decision to grant rights to gay couples is not a Supreme Court decision to trample someone’s right not to participate in a gay wedding ceremony. Conversely, someone’s right to hold religious beliefs does in no way imply that gay couples ought not to have the right to marry. Yet the author of this article, in an orgy of contorted reasoning, seems to think otherwise.

And what are these “rights as a government employee” that the author makes reference to? Is it the right to see others follow religiously-derived morality that, to be frank, is more of a way of following orders — no matter how evil — than it is the following of your own good conscience? Is it the right to quit a job? Is it a right to be able to adhere to religious tenants and have such tenants respected? The only “rights” that Ann Barnett has out of these three, legally, is the right to HOLD her own beliefs, and to quit her job if the job, in her own view, interferes with her beliefs. She has no right to have her beliefs respected as good or right beliefs, nor does she have the right to see others agree. She does, to be clear, have a right for protection against abuse on the basis of her beliefs, but this is different than having a right to demand that others adhere to what she believes is proper action. Futhermore, she has no protection from certain bona fide job requirements, one of which is to respect the legally granted rights of others no matter what her personal inclinations.

And then there’s the social goods argument — protect the children, protect families, etc. etc. Well, for one thing, one can make a very good case for why gay marriage itself will bring positive social goods, and even to children. On the other hand, we can question why gay marriage will ever hurt children and families in the first place. Given that this claim of “harm” is never fully or clearly spelled out, though, it’s hard to argue against it. Perhaps the author, Mr. Perkins, can clarify it for us. However, given the arguments that he’s already made, I’m betting any clarification will be just as contorted and incoherent.

From Canada, where marriage was never ruined, with love,

Justin

I am a woman happily married to a man for over 25 years.

Our marriage is in absolutely no danger whatsoever from other committed consenting adult couples in love being able to express their love and commitment through marriage and the willingness to take on all of marriage’s responsibilities.

I’m thinking that if this were 60 years ago, you might have been among those preaching against the “imminent destruction of society” from “the evils” of interracial marriage. “Unfortunately” (for such fear-mongers), society didn’t fall apart in California in 1948, nor in the United States in 1967.

With respect to gay marriage, society ALSO “unfortunately” did not fall apart in the Netherlands in 2001, in Canada and Belgium in 2003, in South Africa in 2006, nor in Massachusetts in 2004, and doubtless will also not fall apart in Norway effective in 2009.

If you feel your own heterosexual marriage is in danger, look within your marriage for the cause, because the seeds of divorce come from within. There are many good marriage counselors out there, there is hope.

Seriously, it hurts to read columns like this. I grew up with family values…being respectful to others…there is no space for prejudice or for being judgmental. I learned that if people don’t invade your limits you should be understandable and tolerant to whatever they want to do with their own lives. When I read this column I feel like someone writing this is full of hate inside. And…the worst part of it…most families have a gay member. I feel sorry for someone born gay in a family that might make him/her unhappy for a lifetime.

Please, give someone reasons to be happy; don’t make the mistake of making life miserable for something you don’t understand.

Just how does gay marriage “threaten” staright marriage–come on right wingers-it’s a control thing by you. don’t let anyone do anything you don’t approve of for some narrow minded reason.

No, noone is without sin in this world. Jude 1:1-24 explains this new state of moral decline with verse 4: “….they have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord”.

Whatever excuse you want to use for immoral behavior, wrong is wrong. If you want to address me for my sin, so be it, I want to be more like Christ, not less. Let’s adress each individually, not lump them up in some convenient “ism” that works for such and such community against another. Sodom and Gomorrah are just as real as Christ, Moses and Jacob. You can’t pick and choose.

Sharon Stone was not far off. Call it what you want, there is always consequence. I’m just sorry she couldn’t stick to her guns. Our country and the world’s story has already been written, we’re just watching it play out.

Ann Barnett, Candace Grubbs, and those who think and behave like them need to reexamine their positions. They are supposed to follow the law and leave their personal beliefs out of their jobs. If they are so committed to those beliefs that they cannot do their jobs, they should resign. If they continue to flout the law and the rules & regulations permit it, they should be fired.

The issue becomes more difficult when you deal with surgical procedures or other medical issues. Does a physician or nurse have the right to withhold lawful medications or treatment because of personal beliefs? I believe that such caregivers should recuse themselves early enough for the patient to obtain timely care from other health professionals. That’s a compromise I’m willing to make because we are dealing with civil society. Whether physicians or nurses who hold such strong beliefs ought to be hired in the first place is also a difficult question: are those beliefs going to compromise the hospital’s (or other health care institution) ability to carry out its mission?

If we are dealing with the armed forces and enlisted personnel or officers fail to follow a lawful order, there’s a different way of handling their actions or failure to act. Here they cannot opt out without serious consequences (or so we hope).

When the people hungry and poor they need God. When they are full and rich, they turn back on Him…. IT’S TIME COMING ,, VERY VERY SOON…. PEOPLE

I totally disagree with gay marriage. I have 2 children who are gay, but if they were to marry I would have no part of it. I love them and I can except there living arrangements, but marriage is not the answer. God choose a man and woman to marry and live their lives with any children they might have. A gay couple can not produce children, yes they can adopt, but there’s not a man and a woman figure for the child to look up to and say oh, I want to be just like my mom or I want to be just like my dad. Come on people think of the here after!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The only way that human life exists and will continue to exist on this planet is through heterosexuality, not homosexuality. Traditional marriage between a man and a woman embraces this fact and promotes procreation and continuation of life on this planet. Homosexuals cannot procreate amonst themselves - a simple inspection of the human anatomy and just a little common sense makes this pretty clear. How does allowing homosexuals to marry take away from traditional marriage? It’s an attempt to legitimize a lifestyle or behavior upon which civilization cannot be exist. Even a child can understand this so why can’t California?

I first want to express my appreciation to Peter Beckman for his informative facts on the case. If only Mr. Perkins could have bothered to put forth objective facts. I am a native Californian born and raised in the central San Joaquin Valley. I am a Christian, I am a hetrosexual over 50 who was married for 15 years. I support the California State Supreme Courts decision to allow two adults who love each other to make a life time legally recognized commitment . Same gender marriages in no way threatens hetrosexual marriages. My marriage ended 15 years ago after my spouse left with the spouse of another couple in my church. It was not my spouse’s first nor last affair. My ex-spouse’s affairs led to four other couple’s, with children, divorce. My spouse attends church, votes Republican, and talks about the sanctity of marriage. I suggest that if Mr. Perkins really cares about marriage he turn is research to the real issues that threaten the family, they have been around since the beginning of time.
Leave the judging to God and support anyone willing to make a life commitment to a person they love. Blessings to all the newly weds, be faithful and love each other and you will have God’s blessing.

Yawn…Can we please focus on some real problems like gas prices, mortgage meltdown, crumbling economy, WAR, the poor, the hungry, Social Security, Medicare and the National Debt. Get your heads out of your behinds and start concentrating on some real problems. Leave the minutia for some other time.

FED UP IN NEW YORK

I always have to laugh at people like Mr. Perkins and just feel so bad for them. What is so hard to understand about everyone being granted equal protection under the law? THat is not judicial activism it is following the constitution. I’m glad that courts don’t take religion into account when making decisions because that is exactly what they are supposed to do. What ,Mr. Perkins, do you believe Gay Marriage will lead to? How does it threaten traditional marriage? Are you now tempted to get a gay marriage instead of a straight one? If you want to preserve the sanctity of marriage then end divorce. Teach couples how to work at their relationships. Teach people what love is truly about. But No, you want to be angry that someone is trying to take away your right to hate, your right to discriminate, your right to feel superior. You are opposing love, and in a world that is so full of hatred, so full of divisions we should applaud when two people want to commit their lives and hearts to one another. We are all the same, you are not better than anyone else and the time has come for you to accept that and fight the fights that really matter.

Tony Perkins, President of Family Research Center, here’s some research you can do. Find me a time when “natural” marriage required a piece of paper or notification of others? You would do more for mankind with that than along the lines of your current research.

Claire,

There was one without sin…our Savior Lord Jesus Christ. As far as your statement “leave that up to God”…it is clear that the Bible (the Word of God) clearly identifies homosexuality as a sin.

As a Christian I will continue to “love the person” but will also continue to “hate the sin”.

May be next step is legalization of marriage with animals.
Poor California and America.

“thousands of years of natural marriage”???? give me a break Mr. Perkins. With the exception of the last 70 years or so marriage has been an instituion of female subjugation. Many societies, and some pockets in America, still practice polygamy which historcally is more prevalant than today’s one-man-one-woman marriages. And despite the efforts of backward looking dogmatist like Mr. Perkins, Civil marriage in the past centruy has been transformed into on equal partnership between two consenting adults. If these two clerks want to practice thier religious beliefs in the confines of thier church and forbid same-gender marriage in thier congregations then more power to them. But the first amendmant certainly does not extend to them the right to force thier religious views on any citizen in a civil matter!

The only reason gay marriage should be an issue is if it is made to be MANDATORY. Which it isn’t. So mind your own business and work on your own marriages instead of worrying about other’s

Quite Frankly; this gay marriage allowance sucks…….! Sure our state and federal constitutions allow for numeroous rights as Americans, but where does common Christanity come into our lives? How does that old saying go? “God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” and I’ll go on to say ” nor did God create Eva and Ava”.
Don’t get it twisted; I’m no religous fanatic, but I do believe that Jesus was born, lived and died for our sins, but the United States of America; a country I am born, adore and love being apart of is becoming the “Saddam & Gomorrah”. That has me in fear of the future my children face and their children and beyond.
So to all of the same sex couples entering California to marry; I do wish you well, but as a native of California I also say “handle your business here and go back to your home state” and to the same sex couples already living in California “beware and respectful to the traditional family beliefs and values when you function in society” because the values and ethics I/we (Californians) have tried so hard to distill in our children are now threaten by you and the state of California. Sure I could exit the state myself, but not only am I a child of the United States of America, California is the womb that gave me birth.

Sincerely; California Love….!

Its obvious that you gays are going to whatever the hell you want. As a true Christian, I believe in God’s gift of free will - and that applies to all people. I don’t have to like it, but I cannot force anyone. You freely choose it.

Good luck in your lives, and enjoy the happiness you’ve invented for yourself. I don’t feel threatened in my God-ordained marriage, i do feel sorry for you and your eternal souls.

Dee,

I would suggest you read more on the science of why evolution can produce homosexual behaviour. Homosexuals may not reproduce directly, but their genes also exist in brothers and sisters, who may very well pass on their genes. So, whle homosexuals, in general, don’t pass on their genes (except with IV fertilisation), if they care for a relative and devote resources to their well-being, then they are actually helping their own genes survive.

Furthermore, by your reasoning, shouldn’t haemophilia and other hereditary diseases been declining for millenia now, seeing as how they greatly reduce the chances for reproduction?

All of this is very interesting, and I suggest you read, for starters, R. Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene.

I’m suprised at how few people understand the angle from which you are writing. Most people sadly don’t understand the idea of Man-Woman marriage being instituted by God. At the very least it is one of the only institutions evident in nature itself. The legality of same-sex marriage is just another step towards a steady erosion of the family unit in America. The effects of which are slowly being felt and expanded in America since the 90’s.

I’m suprised the the defenders of same sex marriage get so violently frustrated whenever people reverse the logic of tolerance, and Christians actually begin acting out their faith instead of being the welcomed “Silent Majority”. Christians have a right to oppose same-sex marriage because they are a part of the democratic community in America, and have a very obvious behavioral and natural grounds for opposing it.

you hit it square on the head when you said that homo’s are intolerant of other peoples beliefs. just call a homo a homo and you’re labled and stereotyped as some sort of monster… consenting adults can do what they want to do behind closed doors, but have NO RIGHT in telling and teaching others, such as minors, that their perverted lifestyle is “normal,” when it’s anything but normal.

Lets think of some of the ramifications of gay marriage in California. Are insurance companies going to be forced by the state to recognize a gay couple as a family against their will? If not, how long will it take before a same-sex couple will sue for unjust/unfair treatment? If an insurance company does cover them as a family, when they move out of state the insurance company may be able to drop them to single coverage. Will the couple then sue again the insurance agency, the State or both to force that region of the country to recognize gay marriage? Will that in some way effect other policy holders? When they want to have kids are companies (insurance and places of employment) going to have to recognize both two women’s simultaneous pregnancies, pay them both for maternity leave and medical coverage? What about when men what to adopt? Are they going to have to sue companies if they don’t treat the men with equal paternity time even though there is no recovery period from adopting as there is from giving live birth? What if the birth rate as a nation drops significantly? Will that in turn create a similar situation with Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare and federal tax income that we see today? Should we even continue to pay Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare in the future? These are just a few quick thoughts that I have not heard anyone talk about yet.

Read Genesis chapter 19 to find out what happens when men have relations with other men. America is on the path.

Homosexuality is nothing more than a maladaptive trait of affluent society. I find it hilarious that so much effort is spent trying to legitimize and rationalize behavior that is counter productive to human life on this planet. This is so obviously wrong that those who have convinced themselves of its acceptance, have done so by warping the very threads that make us human. It’s taken a lot of work and money for people to rationalize the cognitive dissonance that gay marriage creates in a person of ordinary means and sensibilities. Congratulations. The PR machine of the last decade has worked. You have actually succeeded in devolving the species. Next up, woman marries dog…or better “man’s best friend gets a ring.” Rediculous.

RE same sex marriage.

It bothers me that those who do not believe in equity cite polls to support their bias.

At one time in history, women were not allowed to vote; Asian Exclusion laws were on the books, Japanese-Americans were placed in concentration camps during WWII, and the Civil Rights Act was only signed recently in 1965. At each point in time the majority felt that it was “OK” to discriminate against the various segments of our population. Those who stand against marriage between humans of the same sex exhibit a bias similar to those of the past with regard to race. Let’s not let history go unnoticed when discussing the issue of gay (human) rights.

Thank you.

Today two ladies in San Francisco were married that have been in love and together for 55 years, the same as my husband and I. Our marriage was celebrated by society in the 50’s, theirs was shunned. It’s very past the time at our point of history to change this unbelievable travesty to American citizens who have been born GLBT. This is not a theocracy it is a democracy and a republic ,time to realize this Mr. Perkins and company. Common sense, love and tolerance has nothing to do with being liberal, moderate, or conservative, so stop with the liberal, liberal, and more liberal. These moderates are more than tired of the same broken record.

Wow. All these comments so far except one is “for” gay marriage.
Well, I’m not. And let’s examine just a few short points why.
God, that’s right, God said, in His immutable, unmoveable, incorruptable, undisputable, historical, and uncontradictable authored book, said that marriage started with MAN and WOMAN. How is it that a person can’t think even scientifically about this issue. The fact that I am a believer in God and His historical and accurate revelation to mankind aside, vagina and vagina just doesn’t go together; penis and penis just does not do it. The science of man able to pro-creat with another man is impossible. Why deny this? Is it natural? No, of course not. Don’t deny the truth of science to bring into existence your un-natural view on humanity. It not only is UN-natural, but it is a slap in natural marriage’s face. Just think of the result of the next 20 years if all mankind became gay? You would destroy the human race from existence. That is realty folks. That is the truth whether you like it or not, whether it fits your views or not. I’m not gay hater, just a realist. Let’s be real. The lifestyle of gay people is not “better” for human existence. It may be pleasurable for a time, or right in the eyes of man for a time, but it’s result and fruit is death to mankind and the end of natural evolution. Oh wait, can we examine animals for a second. Do boy deers find other boy deers do mate? Of course they don’t. It’s not in the DNA of animals to do so. There doesn’t exist such a thing. Only humans have the propensity to sin in this un-natural way, b/c only humans have the ability to think in such ways. And such is the way of man without God, sinful. Let’s take a minutes to be honest, and perhaps ask God what he thinks, rather than presume that all believers in God want to judge another for their actions. My God, if I was prohibited the right to “judge” or “assess” one’s actions, then how can there even be LAW. This is what LAW does, it judges the actions of men, and impliments penalty for “wrong-doing”. Is it wrong to kill off the human race for the sake of un-natural marriage. I think so. Think people. Think through this to it’s conclusion. Your’s in the only truth that exists……God’s truth….holy scripture. ~Brad

Mr. Perkins I agree with you. Personal beliefs aside, same sex marriage is not natural.
Besides that, in regards to another comment, God does love everyone including gays. He also loves murderers, but that doesn’t make murder right.

Hey everyone - God does love all His creation - but he still hates sin and the scriptures - which I believe come from God, still teach that for a man to lie with a man, a woman with a woman is “pervision” and therefore sin. Passing a law by any Stupreme Court (no misspelling -the Stu comes from STUPID.) does not overided God’s Word. Why don’t we just let men have multiple wives, women have multiple husbands (all at the same time). Why should they be anymore abnormal than homosexuals? Come to think of it, if a child can be tried for murder at 16, why can’t they have sex with whom they choose - regardless of age. We can’t have it both ways - either we can all do what we want or we can’t. I used to live in a country with a government “of, by and for the people”. Somehow, that concept has been taken over by a Liberal establishment that thinks they know what is best for us all. Maybe if we get enough outside tolerance for everything but Christianity (the principles this country was founded on) we can all do what we want, when we want, with whom we want - and to hell with everyone else. But - I am sure the liberal establishment would make sure that never happens - unless they want it to.

God help us all - we have lost our moral compass.

The homosexual community should be allowed the freedom as everyone else. It’s nobody business, but their own. True, I don’t like the homosexual thing, but it’s here in full force and I respect the right to choose who you want to spend your life with whether it be male or female. My brother is gay, and I love him for him. The lifestyle is not for me, but however, he’s a good person and that’s the life he wants and is happy with it. His life doesn’t effect how I live or the rest of my immediate family lives. Hell, my best friend is as well. I just wish America would stop butting in where it doesn’t need to be. Stop trying to control and tell people what to do with their life. And like so many others, it’s not going to affect the sanctimony of marriage. It may be of the same sex, but the the beliefs are still the same, staying committed to one life partner and all that other stuff that goes with it. Hell, I was watching a special on the gays that were married and raising kids,so far they seem to have a better idea of family values than those that are not.

We do not limit marriage to Christians, nor do we deny agnostics and atheists the right to marry.

We do not ask heterosexual couples if they are fertile. We do not ask heterosexual couples if they will be having children.

We do not ask people to abstain from marriage and intercourse if they do not plan to have children.

Marriage is nothing more than a contract between two individuals for inheritance and ins… We do not ask heterosexual couples if they are fertile. We do not ask heterosexual couples if they will be having children.

We do not limit marriage to Christians, nor do we deny agnostics and atheists the right to marry.

We do not ask people to abstain from marriage and intercourse if they do not plan to have children.

Marriages in a church that are not recorded in a courthouse are not deemed legal. Marriages by officials who are not members of the clergy that are recorded in a courthouse, are recognized as legal.

Marriage is nothing more than a contract between two individuals for legal, inheritance, and insurance purposes. While many people romanticize it, many do not. The reality is that people who marry don’t have to have any emotional attachment whatsoever.

There’s no legal reason to deny the contract.

The California constitution separated marriage from religion conclusively: Quoting from the recent decision: From the state’s inception, California law has treated the legal institution of civil marriage as distinct from religious marriage. Article XI, section 12 of the California Constitution of 1849 provided in this regard: “No contract of marriage, if otherwise duly made, shall be invalidated by want of conformity to the requirements of any religious sect.” Marriage is first a civil union and a religious ceremony is not required by law.

Reading this post, I was reduced to tears. Mr. Perkins, you and those like you are what drove me from the Christian religion I practiced and taught for for almost twenty years.

Firstly, two men or two women marrying will not (or at least, should not) have any effect on your heterosexual marriage. It will not make your marriage any more or less valid in the eyes of the law.

Which brings me to my second point: the seperation of church and state. Marriage is not just the romanticized white-dresses-and-red-roses affair Hollywood makes it out to be. Marriage is a legal union. The only thing disallowing same-sex marriage is preventing is the legal benefits a heterosexual couple shares. If a same-sex couple shares the same love and devotion as a heterosexual couple, no amount of homophobia is going to come between them. Who are you or any other religious zealot to come between a legal agreement between two consenting adults? Let the fluffy bunny marriage ceremony stay in the church; let churches decide if they will perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples. But how DARE you sit on your self-righteous high-horse try to impose your particular moral beliefs on someone who may not share them.

I am praying for you, Mr. Perkins. And while I hate your sin, I love you, the sinner.

Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don’t worry ROGER! Life in the planet will not be extinguished because of gay marriage. Gays always existed in this planet and we still have a concerning growth of its population. Be reasonable! Your comment is immature. Even if California or other states/countries do not allow gays to get married, gays will still be here…and many more will be born. Yes, that’s true! BORN GAY! Maybe nobody can explain that yet…but that is something innate, not acquired. It’s not a matter of choice!

People are so hypocritical.

Newt Gingrich divorced his wife on her death bed. Ronald Reagan and Bill Frist were both divorced. Guess they didn’t hold the “institution” of marriage as all that sacred. And they want to preserve Brittney Spears’ ability to marry every week.

The Old Testament bible thumpers are so fond of waving around prohibits the eating of shellfish, cutting hair, growing flowers indoors, mixing cattle, wearing cloth made of mixed fibers, and divorce among other things. Why aren’t the protectors of marriage rallying to ban divorce?

Oh, and that same Old Testament encourages slavery.

Read your bible, folks.

Maybe I’m being overly simplistic, but for decades, the traditional “attack on marriage” has been divorce. Half of all traditional marriages end that way, so where’s the outrage over the proliferation of divorce lawyers? Or for that matter, where was the outrage over Giuliani, Thomson, or for that matter Reagan (first divorced President)?

Say what you will Mr. Perkins, you don’t like Gay people, and you wrap your intolerance in the narrow wording of your faith to support that intolerance.

Mr. Perkins,
I completely agree with you and commend your standing up for what is right and ultimately what is right for America. God Bless You.

This country is going to hell in a hand basket. Cry out all you sinners. Civil rights. This is a choice alright. Its a choice to live in sin and disobey the commandments of God. You that write your comments wouldn’t be around if if weren’t for Mom and Dad. There are no Mom’s and Dad’s in gay marriage. Don’t you get it? How will this destroy things? Example for one. Gays are no more “special” in their sin than a person who has some kind of addiction. And you all cry out for rights. Freedom of speech comes with responsible and gay marriage is so illresponsible. I love you, its your sin that makes me so sick. God said to love the sinner, but to hate the sin. Gays need to repent and forsake their sin and come unto Christ. Its as simple as that.

Re: Tony Perkins question: “Where do you draw the line?” (three people, underage people? animals?, incest?)

Answer: homosexuals are natural citizens belonging to a numerical minority with a different in-born sexual orientation, unequal in number, but equal in rights just as are blacks and other minorities. You draw the line at the same age limits (eighteen) and number of people that can marry (two) and current martial status required (single or divorced) that you do with heterosexuals. End of discussion. That question is obfuscating, and purposely so.

Let these so-called Christians disagree with gay marriage if they must, but they DON’T have the right to prevent same sex couples from marrying. Not everyone is a Christian, or follows that line of thinking.

Tony Perkins post is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve have ever read here, not to mention completely disgusting.

Well said Mr. Perkins. I’m glad that people like you can stand up for your beliefs and what’s right. We need more good people like you standing up against this decline in morality.

whats wrong with gay people marrying. just who are they hurting?
haven’t we moved a bit beyond the old testament as an arbiter of our lives
pete NZ

There is one aspect of this issue that CNN has totally ignored. Being forced by the government to perform same sex marriages is NOT the only reason for a church to do so. Not all churches are HATE CULTS, like this evil Pharisee wants to turn Christianity into. Some churches BELIEVE in performing same-sex unions, and those churches’ religious freedom is unConstitutionally infringed by the Pharisees’ hate laws.

The government never has forced, or will force, any religious group to perform a marriage it does not believe in. That is a cynical lie spread by the hate groups. Catholic churches, for example, do not have to marry people who have been divorced.

The Constitutional test for government interference in religious practice is “compelling interest.” That is also why no court will strike down a law against traficking in child brides— the government has a compelling interest in protecting children from abuse. However, the government has no right to force people to perform a marriage, (rather than sending a couple to another church or to the state), nor does it have the right to infringe MY right to perform same-sex marriages.

We live in a Judeo Christian society were we believe in God, family, and country. I do not see how allowing same sex couples to “marry” is in accordance with the basic laws of morality. I am not much of a dabater, but I can tell you when something is flat out wrong, and allowing men to marry men or women to marry women is absurd. Some day, we will realize just how rediculous we have become.

It is not part of nature to be homosexual! Also when our courts start making laws above the peoples wishes at the ballot box as a country we have lost our way!

Well LALA Land has done it again! Leave it calif. to legalize an un-natural act!. Unnatural is what it is if 2 men or 2 women was supposed to be together they would make babies but I have yet to see that. But if it did it would happen in calif. But if we must have gays in this country maybe the state of calif. would try to get all gays to live in there state. Which I would be happy to see move them all to calif.

Marriage between only a man and a woman? What of Islamic countries where a man may have more than one wife? Is that also unnatural? It occurred here in the US before polygamy was outlawed (and polyandry is illegal also).

If everyone waited until they were married to have sex and then had sex only to procreate and we had no birth control, we would find ourselves rapidly outproducing our means of feeding ourselves, as Malthus predicted so many years ago.

Let’s all get married, men and women, outlaw divorce, outlaw adultery (it is already still in many states), outlaw abortion, outlaw birth control and see how well off we all are after a couple of decades.

As for spouting off in public on the street corners about one’s religion, I say to them: Matthew 6:6.

A persons moral conviction has nothing to do with their capacity to execute their job duties. If somone refuses to perform a job requirement because they feel it’s a conflict of personal beliefs they should quit and allow someone else to collect the paycheck. Everywhere I’ve worked, if I show up to my job and refuse to do my work it’s considered insubordination. There is no logical reason to appauld such behavior as brave (sounds to me like you’re appaulding an official bilking the system of tax payer dollars and not working for it).

Edwin, you are out of your mind. Violence and crime are not spawned by same-sex marriages. Lack of parental guidance, instruction, barrages of violent video games, etc. maybe are. Loving lesbian/gay couples are not violent criminals. They have nothing to do with the increase of crime in our country. Mr. Perkins, The freedom for gay-lesbian couples to marry does not in any way threaten heterosexual marriages, unless one of those involved is confused about their own sexual orientation. A lesbian couple who live two streets down from me don’t in any way shape or form “rub off” on me, my neighbors, or my neighbors’ children. You need to look deep inside yourself to find what the root of your own homophobic fear is.

This country ensures freedom but we have gone too far when “freedom to marry” a same sex partner is forced upon us by the judicial systems in spite of vote of the people. The majority vote has been disregarded. Is that freedom? This country was created with a government “of the people, by the people and for the people” by majority vote. It was not intended that desires of the majority be overtured by the judicial system in favor or the minority. I personally feel that same sex unions are immoral and a sin in God’s eyes. However, I am more grieved that the vote of the majority has been abolished for the privilages of the few.

I find the thought of Gooch having sex with an animal pretty unappealing, so I hope he controls himself and doesn’t assault one. As to the Family Research Council, the whole operation is a put-on; there is no serious research conducted under its auspices. It exists mainly to alarm conservative people and to keep the cash to ultra-right-wing causes flowing. Unfortunately for David R.’s argument, homosexuality between animals of many species is well documented in scientific research, so it’s hardly “unnatural.” Psychologists, psychiatrists, and the vast majority of practitioners in related sciences do not find homosexual relationships abnormal. So, David R.’s argument might have made sense in a previous milleneum or two, but it surely doesn’t now. Social historians have thoroughly documented the decline of the monogamous family; the trend has little or nothing to do with homosexuality, let alone with homosexual marriage. The pity in all of this is that opportunists like Perkins succeed in alarming otherwise decent people unnecessarily and unfairly.