Ellen Pushes McCain on Same Sex Marriage: “You’re No Different Than I Am; Our Love Is the Same”

Bravo!

It’s amazing to me that any American in this country would still having to fight for equal rights. What a shame.

cindy in nc,
As a straight woman, I support your right to have your relationship fully recognized by the country you live in.
Fight the good fight.
We are all the same.
Jeanne from MI

The problem is not in the legal system. That can be corrected and is being corrected. The problem is the word “marriage” and which institutions have the authority to define it. The question of note is is ‘marriage’ a secular legal term or a religious term denoting a state of sacred union? Because we have a constitution that separates church and state, this is difficult to resolve. It is easy to pick another term that grants all the same civil rights but that is not satisfactory to the gay community. What they are after is social recognition. I’m not against it yet there is a long historical record of how societies throughout history have dealt with this issue which should be understood to give the current struggle more context as to the long range outcomes.
As a political issue, it is extremely divisive therefore a blade any side can wield to as Rove taught, multiply by dividing. Add to the list of battling isms. There is a hilarious cartoon in that for someone.

The next rational argument I hear against affording people the right to marry people of the same gender will be the first one.

I beleive that civil unions are the only area that the Goverment should be involved in. Marriage is a sacred ceremony and the biggest obstacle to it is in our chruches. Civil Rights movements in the 60′s The so called Religous leaders are the biggest obstacle to this issue. Gays and straights are children of “God” and the blessing bestowed on Marriage is a religous not civil issue. Eventually all states will recongnize civil unions as they should. Why is the “Chruch” staying in the shadows?

Jackson: You make a good point, and it is greatly disappointing to me that both Clinton and Obama are on the record in opposition to same-sex marriage.
The happy news is that those who oppose same-sex marriage will–some day soon–be embarassed to admit they ever did. We are on the right side of history on this one, no doubt.

Unfortunately, Ellen used the wrong historical events to argue her case. What she should have talked about is how it was just in 1967 that the supreme court had to rule that interracial marriages were legal. It’s hard to believe that just 40 years ago, there were still 16 states (a third of our country) that would not allow interracial couples to marry. Two people who were in love could not marry because one was white and one was black.
The supreme court finally had to step in (rightfully so) and say the states could not ban interracial marriages.
Now you have two people who love each other and can’t be married because both are men or both are women. Just like with interracial relationships, which for a long time was taboo, same sex marriages are starting to become more and more accepted.
Eventually the courts are going to have to step in just like they did in 1967.
I might take several more decades, but at some point I think same-sex marriages will be allowed.
And future generations will look back in amazement that it took so long for it to happen. Just like I’m amazed (and ashamed) that it took so long for the bans on interracial marriages to be lifted.

It is incorrect to assert that all world religions reject homosexuality. In fact, many Christian and Jewish denominations accept homosexuals. These denominations, or groups, posit that homosexuality in today’s world was not understood at the time that the Bible was written.
In 1969, both the National Institutes for Mental Health and the American Psychiatric Association ruled that homosexuality is not an illness or a disorder. When medical discoveries are made, Jewish law (halacha) is modified. More progressive rabbis will say it is not halachally correct for more traditional rabbis to ignore this discovery and to continue to call homosexuality an illness or a disorder.
Many of these groups also believe that calling homosexuality “unnatural” is incorrect. They site numerous studies which have found that homosexuality occurs in nature among every species of mammal and among most other species of animals. Sexually aroused animals will try to mate with the nearest partner. It has been concluded, therefore, that there is an innate drive toward the release of sexual tension, and this release can be accomplished through either homosexual or heterosexual relations.
More liberal Jews believe that the translation of the word “to’evah” to “abomination” is inaccurate. The other times that “to’evah” is used in the Bible, it is used to refer to forbidden idolatrous acts. Therefore, looking at the biblical context in which the word is used,” the passages in Leviticus about homosexuality must be referring to cultic practices of homosexuality rather than loving homosexual relationships which exist today.
Let’s start “In the Beginning…” What does the creation story in Genesis 1-2 say about God?
This creation story is primarily about God, a story written to show the power of God who created the world and everything in it. It teaches that ultimately God is the Creator, that God shaped humankind, and that God said, “It’s good.” This is the heart of the text in question.
A closer look reveals that there is no mention at all about homosexuality. Because the text says it is “natural” that a man and a woman come together to create a new life, some people think this means gay or lesbian couples are “unnatural.” They read this interpretation into the text, even though the text is silent about all kinds of relationships that don’t lead to having children: 1) couples who are unable to have children , 2) couples who are too old to have children, 3) couples who choose not to have children , 4)people who are single.
Are these relationships (or lack of relationships) “unnatural”? There’s nothing said here that condemns or approves the love that people of the same sex have for each other.
So many Christian and Jewish groups believe the creation story says a lot about God’s power and presence in the universe — but nothing about homosexuality as understood today.
Now let’s consider the second biblical text used by some people to condemn God’s gay children– the ancient story of Sodom. First, what does the story of Sodom in Genesis 19 say about God?
Once again, this story is not primarily about sex. It is primarily about God. Some people say the city of Sodom was destroyed because it was overrun by sexually obsessed homosexuals. In fact, the city of Sodom had been doomed to destruction long before. So what is this passage really about?
Many Christians believe that Jesus and five Old Testament prophets all speak of the sins that led to the destruction of Sodom — and, interestingly, not one of them mentions homosexuality. Even Billy Graham doesn’t mention homosexuality when he preaches on Sodom.
Review it in Ezekiel 16:48-49: “This is the sin of Sodom; she and her suburbs had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not help or encourage the poor and needy. They were arrogant and this was abominable in God’s eyes.”
Today, heterosexuals and homosexuals alike do well to remember that we break God’s heart when we spend all we earn on ourselves, when we forget the poor and hungry, when we refuse to do justice or show mercy, when we leave strangers at the gate.
Admittedly, there are a lot of gay folk who are Sodomites (and a lot of straight folk as well). Sodomites are rich and don’t share what they have with the poor. Sodomites have plenty and want more. While millions are hungry, homeless, and sick, Sodomites rush to build bigger homes, buy bigger cars, and own more property — putting their trust in safer stock portfolios and more secure retirement accounts.
Whatever teaching about sexuality might be found in this passage, it is crucial to hear the central, primary truth about God as well. God has called us do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with our Creator. Sodom was destroyed because its people didn’t take God seriously about caring for the poor, the hungry, the homeless, or the outcast.
But what does the story of Sodom say about homosexual orientation as we understand it today? Nothing.
It was common for soldiers, thieves, and bullies to rape a fallen enemy, asserting their victory by dehumanizing and demeaning the vanquished. This act of raping an enemy is about power and revenge, not about homosexuality or homosexual orientation. And it is still happening.
In August 1997, Abner Louima, a young black immigrant from Haiti, was assaulted by several police officers after he was arrested in Brooklyn. Officer Charles Schwarz held Louima down in a restroom at the precinct, while Officer Justin Volpe rammed a broken stick into Louima’s rectum. These two men and the three other officers involved in this incident and its cover-up were not gay. This was not a homosexual act. It was about power.
The sexual act that occurs in the story of Sodom is a gang rape — and homosexuals oppose gang rape as much as anyone. That’s why the story of Sodom says a lot about God’s will for each of us, but nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today.
Leviticus 18:6 reads: “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female. It is an abomination.” A similar verse occurs two chapters later, in Leviticus 20:13: “A man who sleeps with another man is an abomination and should be executed.” On the surface, these words could leave you feeling rather uneasy, especially if you are gay. But just below the surface is the deeper truth about God — and it has nothing to do with sex.
Leviticus is a holiness code written 3,000 years ago. This code includes many of the outdated sexual laws we mentioned earlier, and a lot more. It also includes prohibitions against round haircuts, tattoos, working on the Sabbath, wearing garments of mixed fabrics, eating pork or shellfish, getting your fortune told, and even playing with the skin of a pig. (There goes football!)
So what’s a holiness code? It’s a list of behaviors that people of faith find offensive in a certain place and time. In this case, the code was written for priests only, and its primary intent was to set the priests of Israel over and against priests of other cultures.
A friend of mine at the age of 10, signed a holiness code written by the Women’s Christian Temperance Union that said he would never taste beer, wine, or liquor. He thought signing it would please God and his grandmother. That’s a holiness code. When he was in high school evangelical Christians had an unwritten holiness code that went like this: “I don’t drink, smoke, or chew, or go with girls who do.”. He obeyed this evangelical holiness code because his parents said that breaking these rules didn’t please God, and he knew it didn’t please them.
There was another evangelical holiness code while he was in high school that prohibited dancing. And he was student body president, yet he refused to go to the prom because he had promised not to dance. He did this to please God and his mother — whose mother had made her sign a holiness code that she wouldn’t go to dances either.
What about this word abomination that comes up in both passages? In Hebrew, “abominations” (TO’EBAH) are behaviors that people in a certain time and place consider tasteless or offensive. To the Jews an abomination was not a law, not something evil like rape or murder forbidden by the Ten Commandments. It was a common behavior by non-Jews that Jews thought was displeasing to God.
Jesus and Paul both said the holiness code in Leviticus does not pertain to Christian believers. Nevertheless, there are still people who pull the two verses about men sleeping together from this ancient holiness code to say that the Bible seems to condemn homosexuality.
Nevertheless, what does this text say about God? Even if the old holiness codes no longer apply to Christians, it’s important to remember that in every age, people of faith are responsible for setting moral and ethical standards that honor God. But all peoples of faith must be very careful not to allow our own prejudices to determine what those standards should be.
Instead of selecting one item from an ancient Jewish holiness code and using it to condemn sexual or gender minorities, certain Christians and Jews now talk together about setting sexual standards that please God — standards appropriate for heterosexuals and homosexuals alike, standards based on loving concern, health, and wholeness for ourselves and for others.
Now what do the Leviticus passages say about homosexuality?
It is very obvious that those passages say nothing about homosexuality as understood today. Here’s why. Consider this single Bible passage that was used for centuries to condemn masturbation:
“He spilled his seed on the ground… And the thing which Onan did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also” (Genesis 38:9-10).
For Jewish writers of Scripture, a man sleeping with another man was an abomination. But it was also an abomination (and one worthy of death) to masturbate or even to interrupt coitus (to halt sex with your spouse before ejaculation as an act of birth control). Why were these sexual practices considered abominations by Scripture writers in these ancient times?
Because the Hebrew pre-scientific understanding was that the male semen contained the whole of life. With no knowledge of eggs and ovulation, it was assumed that the man’s sperm contained the whole child and that the woman provided only the incubating space. Therefore, the spilling of semen without possibility of having a child was considered murder.
The Jews were a small tribe struggling to populate a country. They were outnumbered by their enemy. It is very clear why these ancient people felt it was an abomination to risk “wasting” even a single child. But the passage says nothing about homosexuality as understood today.
Mankind has chosen to discriminate against gays and lesbians; however, God does not discriminate against gays and lesbians. We are all created in the image of God.

In the 1967 decision the courts rightfully intervened because in the case of inter-racial relationships one could not CHOOSE the color of one’s skin it was a matter of genetics. In the case of homosexuality it is still considered to be a lifestyle choice as opposed to genetics. I do remember reading a paper that took the position that homosexuality was the result of trauma at a young age or an abnormality in the development in the brain (I believe it was an over or under production of a certain hormone). To be fair, I also read a paper that gave case study they believed proved that there is a homosexual gene. At any rate, until that issue is settled you cannot make the comparison to interracial unions. This does not mean that anyone homosexual should be denied any rights that this land has for anyone. However, the rights of a particular class should not imposition the rights of another. Specifically, the freedom of religion should not suffer for their opposition to this lifestyle and should have the freedom to call it what they BELIEVE, by their religious teachings, it to be, in my case – sin.

Ellen’s just telling it like it really is…

I think it’s people’s right to be gay or whatever they want to be; but I don’t want to hear about it publicly. It’s taboo and against nature but whatever, it’s their personal choice except that they cannot force the public to accept that (and this issue is totally different than voting rights). I think it’s best if the society leaves them alone and they leave the society alone.

Ellen Degeneres is not just an actress, or a talk show host, or an “entertainer”; she is a human rights trailblazer. She is the “Rosa Parks” of the civil rights struggle for homosexuals. Bravo Ellen! Bravo!

Marriage should be a relious ceremony with each church deciding who they will or will not marry.
A Civil Union should be the legal status – for both Gay and Straight Americans. Exactly the same.

oops
religious not relious

BRAVO, Dharma Guy | May 22, 2008 12:04:57 PM
You have written the Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing But the Truth on this matter. Thank you.

I love what this guy had to say Posted by: Not Your Average Joe | May 22, 2008 12:05:15 PM
It’s nice to see someone really dig deep actually read history in its real context, and not twist it for what people are taught to believe. So much hate and anger towards who we are.
I’m a missionary’s kid and love God with all of my heart, though I don’t attend church because I’m not wanted there. I’ve lived with my partner for many years and am very happy. I lead a very private life bc of being a gay person. I didn’t choose this and have lived single for years until my first partner that I’m now with, that I will stay with till deaths do part. That’s a vow I take internally even though this can’t be recognized on paper, and we can’t adopt or have rights or insurance. This is America for us, and to see the law passed in CA was a pleasant and happy surprise.

To be married you do not need the church anymore. So why is the arguement against gay marrage always centered around the bible? We seperated church and state. The government HAS to treat people as equals. Where’s the debate? If two persons of the same sex want to be legally married I don’t see a justifiable legal arguement that prevents it.
Should a particular church not agree to marry two gay people, ok so what. The government denying this is criminal. IS our constitution for all Americans or just those that go to church?

To “Ken” – I can see your argument and appreciate it for its openmindedness, but there is a serious problem with it core. If different churches can pick and choose if they want to marry people, it is no different than different Woolworth’s department stores in the 1960′s deciding who can, and cannot sit at their lunch counters. It does not matter if a Woolworths does it or a church, its still, at its core, discrimination about human beings. God’s children.

DeGeneres said, “Blacks didn’t have the right to vote until 1870.”
It was only on paper that Blacks had the right to vote. They were required pass a test and pay poll taxes. Slaves did not have access to the same standards of education as their slave masters so you can imagine how much education they received. Have you forgotten the voting rights act was passed in the 60s? Even today, in the 21st century, several states have passed laws and others are in the process of doing so in order to block voting rights for many americans. These laws that require three photo IDs are designed and written specifically to take away voting rights. And guess what party is pushing passing of these laws. Certainly not the Dems.

“it feels… it feels… it feels”
We are so persuaded by someone saying things “feel” a certain way. Where is the line between determining something based on fact vs. “feeling.”
Feelings are some of the most inconsistent, unreliable indicators of truth at times. You rest your life solely on “feelings” and it’s like depending on something that is blowing in the wind, apt to twist and turn in any unpredictable direction at any time.

This year will be my 29th year of marriage. My wife and I have three grown children and never considered we would have close gay friends. We were introduced to two wonderful women that we have become very good friends with and I would be proud and honored to attend an eventual wedding if they so choose. These two women are over sixty and love each other dearly which is obvious to anyone that knows them. I have known few gay people in my adult life but the ones that I have met I am certain it’s not a choice that the religious right try’s to portray; it’s a love for the person they found. So to Karin and Peg, if you happen to be reading this page, Annette and I will always raise our glasses to a toast or your relationship.

When was church and state separated? From what I could tell church is what won the last presidential election. Church is the reason the south is still having lame-duck laws passed like the very law that kept a young man in prison for oral sex way longer than he should have ever gone. Do not say that church and state are separate because that is a dream that is hardly reached.

And no that one editor is NOT god…

Well, LEGALLY they’re seperated. Maybe it’s time we all call the gov’ment out on this one.
I guess as long as kids aren’t saying the Pledge of Allegance in school it’s all good?

McCain laughed. “Touché,” he said.
What a douché this man is.

I don’t expect people to understand the Christian viewpoint on this issue, but it is sad to see the hatred in some of these posts. As a Christian, I do oppose same-sex marriage to the same degree that I oppose heterosexual sex outside of marriage. I do so not out of hate for others or prejudice, but love. When we understand that God is holy and that he made sex to be an enjoyable experience between a husband and wife, it is a blessing. Anything different than God’s original design is sin. When genuine Christian’s oppose such things as same sex marriage, the motivation is the same motivation that we would use to warn others in a burning building. If those on the 10th floor don’t realize there is a fire on the 1st floor, the loving thing to do is warn them. To be silent or just say I will let them find out on their own is not loving. A homosexual friend of mine died of aids many years ago. I warned him of his lifestyle and shared with him the love and forgiveness of Jesus Christ. When I visited him when he was sick, I still loved him and we were still friends. More importantly God still loved him and his invitation to come to Him for fogiveness stood his entire life. Sadly, he never repented of His sin and for that my heart ache’s. The truth is, although my sins are different, I still have sinned and need to repent. The message is the same for all, whether it is the hot button of homosexuality or lust or stealing – we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Elle’s heart may ache for being united with her partner, but that pales in comparison to the ache of a Christian who knows that there is a God who judges sin and provided a means of forgiveness in Jesus Christ only to see others reject the free gift. Friends don’t let friends drive drunk, and friends don’t let others harm their eternal future without warning them.

DrNyman, please. It is an absolute, bald-faced lie to claim that christians in this country oppose heterosexual sex outside of marriage as much as they oppose the rights of same-sex couples. Where are the constitutional amendments against adultery?

“Regardless I believe its time for churches to be taxed. There is way too much money going in and out, more so than anyone thought possible when the laws were originally conceived. Say what you, but church is BIG business.”
Some churches are large non-profits… but much bigger are the United Way, Red Cross, Bill/Melinda Gates Foundation… I suppose we should tax them as well?

I think that both Ellen and McCain handled a touchy subject very well. They are both entitled to believe in what they wish. I’m all for people getting to marry whomever they choose to – however, gay/lesbian people should not try to force others to agree with them on what they believe in and what they feel is “right”. Religion is and always will be a very touchy and gray area for certain subjects. Let’s just allow people to be people.

God, I hate to start this, but wouldn’t the question be better directed to Hillary Clinton who Ellen supports? It was Bill who proudly signed off on DOMA and never looked back? Not even a Rwanda-style regret. So catch me up, has Hillary mentioned plans to overturn DOMA if elected?

TromGator – The arrogance of organized religion is they believe they have the divine right to define what is right and what is “wrong” for everyone. They do not.

Dan,
Take religion out of it, what if it’s something society generally deems is “wrong,” but someone has the feelings tempting them to “naturally” still do it… is their lack of choice in having those feelings make the action “right?”

Senator McCain would give a medal to a man for killing another one, but would not say he approved of him marrying one. So much for this land of equality – I’ll go sit in back of the bus where I belong since I strongly believe that marriage is the unification under God of two consenting adults and it’s none of anybody else’s business – not mine, yours nor Senator McCain’s.

GBH,
There are many large non-profits with executives making CEO-type money… Again, should United Way, Red Cross, etc, etc, be taxed? Should the lifestyle/salary of the CEO (Pastor) be the guideline for non-profit status (as opposed to organizational structure)? If so, then we will begin taxing many, many, organizations (churches would be a small percentage) that are currently not being taxed.

Well, I really couldn’t care less what the bible says. It is a book of stories as far as I’m concerned. That book simply doesn’t belong in our system of laws.
Need I remind people that not EVERYONE in the country is Christian?

In my own opionion, active homosexuality is nothing more than acting upon a sinful impulse.
If we are going to “give the okay” for homosexuals to “marry”, on the premise of human rights, then we might as well say its alright for people to murder eachother or steal from eachother, it’s their right as human beings to act on their own personal impulses, right? But then again I guess we already DO say it’s okay for people to murder eachother daily by the thousands by “okaying” abortion(murder of innocent and helpless babies), eh?

TromGator – ok, religion out of it. Not ALL society deems being gay wrong. And whether you are willing to admit it or not, most arguments against gays are religion based and if you were being honest the likelihood is yours is too.

Keep trying to portray yourself as normal, Ellen. But, you are far from the same as an old school guy like McCain. When he was your age, being gay or lesbian was scandalous. You wont change the opinions of people my parents age I assure you. I accept you as you are. But, dont try to get the old folks to. They wont!!!

OK, sorry I didn’t spell it all out. I was refering to taking “God” out of the Pledge of Allenance. It points out the picking and choosing of where the seperation of church and state is being applied.
The whole point is that EVERYONE should be allowed to be married by the state.

Dan,
You said:
“I have known few gay people in my adult life but the ones that I have met I am certain it’s not a choice that the religious right try’s to portray;”
So my point is, should “it’s not a choice” equal “it is ok?”

I would have to agree with Senator McCain. In the Bible it says, “Adam and Eve”, Not ADAM AND STEVE. No it is wrong to marry another person of the same sex.

Marriage should be for all people marrying any other person they so choose. The bigotry of sexism must be further realized in this nation.
If we truly believe in equality we must recognize that discriminating against people based on their gender is wrong.
Ask yourself, which of your parents do you love more? Which of your parents worked the hardest? Which of your parents helped you through your troubles the most?
Can you answer any of those questions without hesitation? Why? Is it because your father went to work while your mother stayed home? Or did your father leave you and your mother? Are your answers based on gender discrimination?
If you hesitated on any of those questions then you probably truly see your parents not as a man and a woman but as two individuals who cared for you, raised you and provided for you. Those same two individuals who guided you through troubles and celebrated your victories. Would it truly make a difference if your parents were of the same gender? Take out any outside prejudice and imagine yourself alone in the house with two same-gender parents. Does it matter what gender your parents are?
There are still societies that many conservative Americans would scoff at as being third world and in many of those same societies blatant and state-sanctioned discrimination against women occurs. We should not compare ourselves to these other societies as being inferior or superior but rather notice the similar pattern of ignorance and gender discrimination. We should realize that gender stereotypes do not provide liberty and justice for all. Gender discrimination is un-American.
We must act to declare that discrimination based on a person’s gender is just as immoral as discrimination based on race or disability. Marriage is currently discriminatory in most states and such discrimination must stop. We are all human beings who love and hurt. End Gender Discrimination NOW.

For all of those who dont believe in the Bible, where do you get your personal list of rights and wrongs? is there nothing wrong? and everything is okay to do? Regardless of the Bible and what it says there have always been “rights and wrongs”, it seems like these days everyone is saying that anything goes and as long as you “feel” it is okay then it is considered a “right”. there is no gage anymore of what is right or wrong. Unless people return to looking toward God for the answers and His gage of right or wrong that he gives us in His Word, the whole world is hopeless and may God have mercy on your hard hearted souls.

john – just as you are “pushing your view” that there is something wrong with homosexuality. You do not have the right to push your view and squash someone’s right to speak the opposite view. It’s called freedom.

Lots of small minded people here. I follow the age-old “golden rule” thank you very much. And I am happy as can be.

I’m a heterosexual woman who was married to the love of my life for 26 years until he died of cancer. I do not see how allowing gays to marry would have affected my marriage or done any harm to anyone. Why shouldn’t gays have the same rights as all of us? If your church doesn’t believe in it, then gays will not be marrying in your church.

jock59801 – Our law is based on the bible!!
This whole thing with homosexuality is getting out of hand.
Stop trying to shove down peoples throats, because that is where the hatred is being caused!!

What you guys haven’t read in JoshD’s post is that it doens’t matter if your parents are m-f, m-m, f-f…they’re YOUR PARENTS. Period.

The bible is a lovely book of fictional stories. It is not the law.

Cindy in NC,
I’m straight and support you, and support your right to marry your beloved.
Kathy in NYC

How about we change the concept. Legal unions for everyone for government recognized joinings. If you want to use the marriage word, you could get married by clergy, but you would still need a legal union in order to have the government recognized it. That way those who interpret the biblical definition are satisfied and those who want to pledge their love for their partner and have it legally recognized and enjoy the benefits of ‘marriage’ can have it as well.

What I dont understand If you are in love with a man and you say you are a man why do both or at least one of you act and look like a woman. Thats what I dont understand. Not judging.

we all have an inherent knowledge of right and wrong and all the reteric and attempts at justification are simply excuses for weakness. something that can change at will- providing there is the desire.
kind of simple is it not.

we need libertarians not liberals and not consevatives. I don’t want to conserve taxes, government spending, and other liberal big brother stuff. flush all that junk down the toilet with the other junk….

Ellen had helped to Unite the right wing Republicans around McCain’
LOL

Isn’t Ellen brave??? Lets see her do that in front of an unfriendly crowd. I support Elton John’s position. If civil unions are good enough for him, they are good enough for me.

There is nothing inside of me telling what I am doing is wrong. In fact, it’s quite the opposite! It’s people like you, who claim to be the mouth of god, that give the idea of chrisanity a bad name! I’ll say it agin, my family, my church, my pastor and friends all support me!!! MY CHURCH BELIVES IN MY RELATIONSHIP!! Maybe yours doesn’t, hence the reason I don’t go there! My God supports my relationship, to bad your god doesn’t!! His loss, not mine! Have you not figured it out yet, my God is a loving God, maybe yours isn’t!!

Ever hear of the separation of church and state? Where in the constitution does it say that the bible is the law of the land? (Hint: it doesn’t). Keep your antiquated bible out of my face and don’t force your so-called morality on me.

stick to your guns. Way to go McCain.

KC -
the problem is the financial and legal benefits that the state gives to married couples. Everyone has the right to equal access to those benefits, regardless of what name you use for it.

It is interesting that name calling, insulting, or talking bad about Christians and their beliefs is acceptable in America. They are not the only group to whom this happens, but they are the only group to which those things can be done and no one thinks that it is close-minded or hateful or is somehow not right. Christians will at least say it is your right to believe however you wish. They may not agree with you, but that is tolerance. It is not tolerance to tell Christians they cannot believe what they believe. If they want to believe that they are the only ones who are right, that is their right!!

OK, Ellen, so you’re gay. So what? What do I do now–have a parade?
I respect your personal choices, but I resent having them shoved in my face. You be you, I’ll be me, and you’ll let me be, OK?

justin
it is my understanding that the seperation of church and state has been improperly stated—-people came here for religious freedom and to insure this the government has no say in this matter—–people have turned this around and now believe it is so religion cannot rule government—howevcer our laws show differenr values

I disagree with everybody calling ‘marriage’ a religious term and the legal term should be ‘civil unions’, etc.
As far as I can see and as far as the courts should see, the term “marriage” is strictly a legal term. To get married (at least here in Texas), you have to go to the County Courthouse and get a “Marriage License”. Once you have the state issued license, then you can get married by a State authorized person (like a Justice of the Peace, etc). Even if a priest, minister, or pastor marries you, they still say “by the power invested in me by the State of —– “.
From a legal standpoint this is all done on a secular level. Religion and
the Bible have nothing to do with it. If marriage is only about religion, then two people who aren’t religious can’t be married. Or two people of different religions (Buddhist, Hindu’s, etc) wouldn’t be able to be married.
My wife and I got married at the County Courthouse by a JP. We had no religious ceremony. In the eyes of our state, the courts, the IRS, and all other government entities we are legally married.
So, when the courts hear these cases (about same-sex marriages), and the states pass these laws, and the people vote on constitutional amendments about marriage, they should be doing so only from a legal and secular viewpoint!!!
If marriage is a religious term (particularly a Christian/Biblical term), then all marriages between non-religious people don’t count. Then all marriages from people of other religions besides Christianity don’t count. Then all marriage between inter-religions don’t count. But, that’s not the case here in the United States. You can both be atheists and married by the court and as far as the state/government is concerned you are just as married as a couple who were married in the church.
You can have religious ceremonies for marriages, that’s completely up to the individuals getting married. But as far as the government & courts are concerned, “marriage” is ONLY a legal term!

AppeaseThis – Where in the Constitution does it say Separation of Church and State??
bwwlove – McCain does not believe in same sex marriage, that was what the argument was about
Ken – M-M or F-F can not be your parents, that is an impossibilty. Marriage should on be between two people who unless a medical illness can naturally have a baby! that means Male and Female only.
By the way they will start trying to sue churches who refuse to marry them if it is allowed by law!!

James -
Your God. I believe in your God – full of love and acceptance and comfort. You are a brave man and I think your man (sorry if I missed his name) is a lucky man, indeed, to have you. Your love is evident in your every post. THAT, in my opinion, is the true message from God. That, is what fulfills the heart and soul. Love.

I’m sorry if this offends but the truth must be told:
The concept that gay love is the same as heterosexual love is a falacy. The love between a man and woman is different because it alone has the capacity to be fulfilled in the creation of a new life that joins the man and woman together completely. A NEW LIFE that is the bonding at the most basic level from conception is the ultimate purpose of love. The man gives himself to the woman and the woman to the man and out of their love a new creation that has their DNA their eyes and ears and looks and heredity and manerism etc. is created. This new life is the foundation and basic element of society. We as a society work and build and provide for the youth who are the very future of humanity. The nuclear family is the forming ground and the common unity of humanity. ALL people have a common need for love and belonging. The FAMILY is the perfect place for the understanding and nurturing of love to begin, grow, and develop. Children should gain a knowledge of love from their parents and siblings. Without this foundation society is a selfish mess. Children in foster homes do not flourish in the ways children of a loving marriage do. Their are exceptions to every rule but if we destroy marriage for the purpose of making gays feel better then we have lost sight of the most basic element of society and of humanity. Gay love is a counterfeit to the real lifegiving and socially beneficial love of a man and a woman. The two are NOT the same. Sorry but the truth is what it is regardless of what you want it to be. Period.

I suggest everyone read Eric Zorn’s blog about this:
In short, the government would only recognize civil unions (for heteros as well as gays) and the various religious bodies would be the ones to recognize the ‘sacrament of marriage’, each according to their views.
Why? Because sacraments belong to religion, not government.

Tom, thanks for making my point. Marriage is a sacrament. The government should not call a union between 2 persons performed outside of religion a marriage.

This argument isn’t about how you love someone, it’s simply that a religion sactioned joining of 2 people is called a marriage and a sanctioned joining of 2 people by the government should be called a civil union, AT ALL TIMES. Gay or not. This means a town hall wedding (even between man & woman) should be considered a civil union because it isn’t performed as a religious sacrament.

Jim, I totallly agree with your point of view! Now will you tell that to the insurance industry that has said that civil unions are not marriage, therefor they can deny insurance to the “un-married” partner of many people in NJ! this is why the word is important! Just because you are civil-unionized, does not give the social security benefits that you have earned to your partner, because according to the US gov’t, it’s not the same as being married! maybe if all the laws were ammedned to state what you said, and these laws were equal, gay people wouldn’t be so militant about why we want to get married! i want death right, hospital rights, visitation rights, tax rights, and many others that are gratned once a person becomes married!! this is why the word is important!!!

To some it may not matter what the rules are here on earth…but once you hit eternity…what will the answer be?

Matt:
You got one thing right about McCain on Ellen: he was sheepish. Sheepish because he knows this issue is a loser for him and his bankrupt party.
Equating sexual discrimination to race and gender as the latter two pertain to voting rights is a perfectly adequate and relevant argument to make. ALL forms of discrimination, when they show up in our laws, are antithetical to our nation’s founding principles. Slowly, and with no small amount of trouble along the way, we have eliminated the backwards thinking of bigotry from our laws and folkways. This is just the latest phase, and it’s high time for it.
Marriage, as a concept and a practical means of addressing status, cannot be rooted out of the legal system and changed in all 50 states. It’s not possible. So, the more equitable, sensible solution is to do what California and Massachusetts have done — and let it take hold across the country. Only in this way can a married couple, regardless of whether they’re straight or gay, attain the rights held by the majority. Only in this way will they be legally recognized.
This is not “giving away” anything — it won’t change life for you or me in the slightest. It will, however, separate those of us who cherish freedom from those who only pretend to do so.

I wish I could continue this fun discussion but I have to go. However before I do, the matter of civil unions is for the states to decide, but the reason why marriage has certain benefits ascribed to it is precisely because it benefits society at large. Families form and build up society by properly nurturing children to be responsible contributing members. It is not because two heterosexual people emotionally love one another. Nor is it because two heterosexuals procreate. If that were all that it is then gays would have a solid foundation to build and forward their arguement. It is because loving families are the bedrock for a solid value based society. Good families require shared responsibility and effort. Families require self-sacrifice, structure, and resources beyond those of non-families. They require a belief system with values and loving authority that seeks the best interests of all of the members. They do not exist just because someone procreates. They exist BECAUSE two people LOVE! True love is self-giving and seeks the good of the other. It is not centered on self-gratification. If people do not truly love then they cannot build a solid family. One begets the other. Bye

My partner and I are celebrating our 11th anniversary today. We have a daughter who is 4yo and are waiting on the adoption of an infant. I would like to be able to get married, but I am glad to see that things have improved. Ten years ago when Ellen first came out, her show was soon cancelled. Now – the fact that she is on during prime time afternoons is wonderful to me. Also – the fact that McCain was on is a miracle. Slow but sure (not too slow I hope).

If a man can marry another man and a woman can marry another woman, then why can’t a man have two wives or a woman two husbands. What right then would we have to tell them how to live their life. If a man wants to marry his 18 year old daughter and she him, or a brother and sister marry, what right we will have to tell them that it’s wrong. Somewhere there has to be commonsense rules in order for a society to function like it’s got a common sense.

Your argument is the same argument they used against interracial marriages! Where does it end!! People against gay marriage will use any and everything to say this is why gay people can’t get married!! Give me a break! Look what straight people have done with marriage! There are those that want plural marriages, where does it end!! Gay people want to get married, better watch out for the dog! I’m not asking to marry four people or the family dog! I’m not asking for a child to marry!! I’m asking that me and the person that I love, be allowed to form a union, based upon a mutual respect and love for each other, to better the other and to care for the other person! Wow, that kinda sounds just like why straight people get married! Notice I didn’t say I want to marry my boyfriend, his friend and my neighbors dog! GET OVER YOURSELF! We want to marry because we want to be afforded rights over and for the other person that any other word does not allow us to have! Damn, don’t you people get it! I’m not asking for you or your church to say it’s okay! I could care less if you don’t like it! But damn it, I want, we want, to be treated as first class citizens, instead of back of the bus abnormals! Remember this: If it wasn’t for a hetrosexual, there wouldn’t be any homosexuals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Philly J, I am straight, and I agree with you. I am just wondering if you think that all consenting adults, no matter the relationship or quantity of partners, be allowed to be married as well.

It’s painfully obvious what conservatives are attempting to do with these constitutional amendments banning gay marriage.Anyone who grew up in the Civil Rights era knows that a lesson taught is not necessarily a lesson learned, and the children of today will most likely harbor substantially less bigotry towards gay people. These amendments exist solely to tie the hands of future, less-bigoted generations.

In the United States, the only thing that really defines when people are married is a piece of paper issued by the state called a “Marriage License” or something similar. In some states there may also be “common law marriages”.
The State/government doesn’t care if there was any kind of religious ceremony or not. All it cares about is if there is a signed piece of paper that says you’re married.
Why is allowing same sex partners to have this piece of paper such a big deal? It won’t change anything! Case in point:
I’ve lived in my house for 8 years now. When I moved there the next door neighbors were two women. Nice ladies. Come to find out they are a lesbian couple. Been together for years. Been living in the house together way before I moved to the neighborhood. They’ve been great neighbors. They often walk in the evenings and hold hands. They share a bedroom. They drive matching cars.
If the state allowed same-sex marriages, it would not change anything to you or me. My neighbors would still take evening strolls holding hands, they would still share a bedroom, and still drive matching cars. It’s not like all of the sudden their relationship will take on a crazy new level and they will run wild in the streets!
But to them it would mean a lot. They would be able to have extended health benefits from their company, they would be able to file as “married” on their federal income tax returns, they would be able to sign legal contracts as a married couple.
Let them have the piece of paper!

why do straight people always say stuff like, bro and sis, daughter and father?? of course i don’t think that that should be allowed! what is wrong with gay peopele being allowed to marry? how will allowing gay people lead to those other arrangements? your logic would say that straight marriage lead to gay marriage lead to plural marriage lead to interspecies marriage! it just doesn’t make sense! did straight marriage lead to dogs marrying a man??? no, so that argument is just one because you can’t think of another reason to deny gay people the right to form contracts with each other that will be recognized federally, and those federal rights are given to gay coupldes just as freely as they are to straight couples! i shouldn’t have to carry about 15 documents with me when my partner goes into the hospital to gaurentee me the right to visit him! i shouldn’t have to have 15 documents with me when my partner dies and i’m left with a house that i must now pay taxes on in order to keep it because it is considered a gift and there for taxable!! again, has straight marriage lead to a son marrying his mother?? no, so that argument does not make sense! there are fundamental rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that my taxes and my partners taxes payes for! we deserve to form a union, called whatever you want it to be called, with ALL the benefits afforded under this union!! i don’t care about the word, domestic partner, civil union, marriage, i just want ALL THE RIGHTS, not some, so that way my relationship is valid under the law and i am not treated as a second class citizen in this society! gay civil unions in NJ have been denied basic insurance because the insurance company said they weren’t “married.” this is why the word marriage is so important! again, i don’t care what you call my union, but damn it i deserve the rights that any straight person is afforded under the marriage laws!!!`

wow, are there some mean-ass Christians on THIS blog! if legalizing gay marriage meant the immediate dissolution of all straight marriages and a state mandate that all persons, regardless of sexual preference, be forced to marry a person of their own sex, i’d say the opponents have a legitimate beef. that preposterousness aside, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? and don’t give me that “abomination” crap from the bible. the real abomination in this case is the smug, pious cruelty of the “Christians” on this blog who would exclude gay people from a fundamental rite of passage in our society. we human beings all love to fear and marginalize the “other,” because it makes us feel so superior.
if you still allow yourself to think, despite your deep religiosity, ask yourself: why would a loving God make gay people and then condemn them to hell for following their natural impulses?
if homosexuality is a “choice,” as i know many of you fulbright fellows believe, here’s another question for you: exactly when did YOU choose to be heterosexual?
i want some answers! or are you too chicken?

LAW SHOULD NOT BE BASED ON WHAT “GOD” WANTS. WE DON’T ALL BELIEVE IN THE SAME CRUD AS YOU BIBLE THUMPERS OUT THERE. LEAVE YOUR BIBLE AT HOME

MM, I’m not being passive or silent. I am merely saying that being HATEFUL as most are being on here is not the way to go either. I find it ironic how you say “God lovingly warned” when I don’t see any loving warnings here. I see hateful accusation from both sides but especially the “Christians”.
We are to be an example. The Bible is full of many examples where people are “lovingly warned” but it is loving and then they make their OWN decisions. It is not a secision when they are forced to do something. My family member knows how I feel but also knows I love them. I’m not going to constantly shove my beliefs onto them everytime I see them. That would only result in alienation and would prove nothing but closed mindedness which is exactly what I see here. I’m not saying “embrace all beliefs”. Stand firm for what you believe in but don’t be a jerk about it. Be loving.
Believe me, I am NOT passive. I do not drink alcohol. Never have, never will by choice. All my friends know that. Most of my friends (non-christians) do drink and at times heavily. They know my beliefs. They drink around me. They don’t offer it to me because they respect my beliefs. I told them why I don’t drink, once. While they are drinking, I do not “preach” at them what I think about alcohol consumption. I have family that drinks, they know that my family does not. When my sisters and I were younger, they did not drink in front of us out of respect for us and my parents. My parents did not “Bible thump” at them. There is a mutual respect.
I am not encouraging “laying down and playing dead” but state your opinion IN LOVE, move on. Don’t attack. I approuch every discussion as if it were with a close friend or family member just so that I make sure I am doing it love not just reacting. We are all human and make mistakes.
Just because I am a Christian, does not mean I am perfect. FAR from it. “There but for the grace of GOd go I”. I depend on Him daily to guard my mouth and help me not ruin my testimony by my human, selfish sense of “self” and making myself feeled justified. I’m just saying that BOTH sides need to chill. Respect each other and see how far that goes.
The sad thing to me is that the so called “Christians” are reacting just like those that are self-declared non-Christian or even worse. If you are a true Christian, you are held to a higher standard by the God you claim to serve. Prove it.

I can see both sides to this issue. Bottom line for me is that I believe everyone should have the same rights but why does it have to be called marriage? I see no problem with leaving that term for heterosexuals since that is the way it has always been. If homosexuals want to make a commitment and receive all the same legal rights, why can’t they come up with their own name for their union. Marriage is way overrated anyways and the divorce rate is higher than ever, and as a fellow human, I think everyone should think twice about it.

What business is it of anyone to pass judgement on other people’s relationships? Why does it provoke such huge feelings? If my neighbor is gay and wants to live as a married couple, how does that affect MY life? IT DOESN’T! If my neighbor gets health insurance from his work for his partner by virtue of marriage, does that affect MY insurance? NO! If my neighbor dies and leaves his house to his loving partner after years of partnership, does that affect MY house? NO! So why would I care how other people choose to live and love? In a Christian sense, then let GOD be judge of the lives of others. Why do I have to be involved? I am not God! Only God can judge the heart of man. In fact, doesn’t the Bible say no man can know the heart of another? I have read the Bible speaking out against homosexuality. I have also read in the same passages, the Bible speaking out in equal measure that a disobedient son should be put to death, gossips should be exluded from the community of believers, no man shall lay with a woman mensruating, etc….These admonitions are equally strong. Isn’t loving and devotion, true Christian virtues? And isn’t hatred and prejudice an anathema in the eyes of God? Could anyone be called Christian, who keep people apart; divide communities with empassioned, enflamed feelings of hatred; encourage fear and prejudice; and finally undermine the genuine affections and happiness of others? I am heterosexual and Christian. I think God is calling upon us to put aside the old laws and allow the love of Christ to fulfill the new law. I do not think actively subverting love, in whatever form it takes, is a Christian act. We accept people for their strengths and weaknesses and allow God to judge their hearts. Somehow Í think that God will judge acts of hatred as the more unforgivable sin.

–Marriage predates Christianity by thousands… and probably tens of thousands of years.–
Yes, it started when God joined a man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife.

Those who claim to be homosexual say that they were created homosexual.
Jefferson said that the Right to life begins at our being created.
Those who claim to be homosexual are at odds with the pro-choice=pro-abortion=wrong-choice people who say that the Right to life begins at birth, thus trying to justify abortion.
Does THAT mean that everybody is created at birth???? That can’t be cuz, clearly, something was created before that.
So, which is it??

Mr. Inredible…I believe with almost everything you said except this, “I am to love my brother, not heathen. Jesus didn’t minister to heathen. Neither do I.” Jesus ate with prostitutes and sinners. If that’s not ministering, I don’t know what is. Jesus stated that he came to “seek and save that which was lost”…that means the “non-Christians” the heathens as you put it. We are commanded by Him to go into all the world, not just the civilized part of it and preach the Gospel. I’m not sure how you can be right on in all you other points and totally miss this one. We are also commanded to love others as we love ourself. “hate the sin but love the sinner” as the popular adage does. I love my family member and friends that are homosexual but that does not mean that I endorse that lifestyle.

^^Jesus ate with prostitutes and sinners. If that’s not ministering, I don’t know what is.^^
He came to save the lost of the House of Israel, not heathen. He ministered to the sinners of that House.
^^Jesus stated that he came to “seek and save that which was lost”…that means the “non-Christians” the heathens as you put it.^^
The heathen were not lost. They never were of the House of Israel, and, so, Jesus — the Shepherd — never left the other sheep to go out and look for the heathen.
^^ We are commanded by Him to go into all the world, not just the civilized part of it and preach the Gospel.^^
This is true, but we are not to concentrate on other than the lost sheep of the House of Israel.
However, if the crumbs of the children’s Bread — the Gospel — fall to the floor, the dogs are allowed to lick them up. We are not to give what is holy to the dogs.
^^ We are also commanded to love others as we love ourself.^^
Is THAT the worldly version of “love,” or the scriptural version?
Biblical “love” is “unselfish concern for the Salvation of others, as much concern for their Salvation as you have for your own.” It has nothing to do with worldly “love,” rather giving others what they need for life; after all, Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after Righteousness.
^^I love my family member and friends that are homosexual but that does not mean that I endorse that lifestyle.^^
So, what, according to the Word of God, are you doing to let them know that God condemns homosexuality, that they are as sheep with no shepherd?
Posted by: beccatoo | May 23, 2008 9:23:54 AM

Dear People Who Say that They are Homosexual, Their Supporters and Activists:
What form is Christian love and compassion supposed to take toward those who claim to be homosexual? Like what is it supposed to look? How would YOU recognize it?

^We are commanded by Him to go into all the world, not just the civilized part of it and preach the Gospel. ^
Ok, I got it slightly wrong:
(Gal 1:16) To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen…
Now, I say, “slightly,” cuz that says, “preach,” not “minister to.” “Minister to” would indicate “healing,” whereas, “preach,” indicates “delivering a lesson.”
Let’s say, then, that Jesus never healed a heathen, that, like dogs licking up the crumbs that fall to the floor, the heathen may have seen Him preach and heard what he said.

Waffie
Mr. Incredible said that in his first post.not to minister to the heathen.
Posted by: melbd | May 23, 2008 9:55:06 AM
————————————-
He has made a slight correction.

What about those who are non-christian? What about Buddhists, Hindus, Pagans, Sieks (sp), etc.? Christians do not have the right to dictate to those who do not live by their code of beliefs on how they should live or not live. Non-Christians should have the same rights as everyone else – but the way this is going, our country is going to end up a Theocracy. AND that means the many ruled by the religious elite. Bleh!!

As a Christian I don’t believe it should be the government’s role to decide what we do with our relationships. There are THOUSANDS of marriages out there that are only on paper and are dead relationships. …and yet there is now law saying “you have to actually love each other to get married”. Marriage is ALREADY just a contract as far as the government’s concerned.
Legislating morality is bad. No law should tell us what to do with our personal life, personal beliefs or personal property so long as we don’t use any of the above to harm others.

Jen,
Go back to the Bible to find true Theocracy and the kind that beccatoo is talking about.

gays should be able to get married just like straight people. after all we are people too, and deserve to do what we want where were at. its not like only straights support america:0