I think that would have a good effect, and be better than the status quo for everybody…even Christians.

I’m also against abortion, and for a flat tax…maybe liberal enough for the fair tax. I feel like running for an elected office now.

Then again, I would also think that affirmative action could be considered unconstitutional if that were the case. I believe that the Supreme Court ruled that discrimination based on stuff like that was ok if it served the interests of the state. (not that I necessarily agree)

Our military also discriminates based on sex for arguably pragmatic reasons.

I think it can be argued that one-man, one-woman, one-lifetime is a state interest for procreating and raising children.

While heterosexual marriage has been the cornerstone of societies since like forever, It may be the case that the many who find homosexuality to be morally wrong may want to vote the government out of the marriage business entirely…though the impact would cause an even worse disintegration of the family unit…which I think many fear would destroy society if non-government organizations were left to track who is married to who…and also that laws against adultery and divorce would become impossible.

Ultimately, even if judges decide it violates the equal protection clause, I think it may end up ultimately in a rewriting of the Equal Protection Clause to have more family-focused wording. Either that would happen, or the government would probably get out of the marriage business before mainstream America would want to have any laws that supported homosexual “marriage”.

Where it ends up I think ultimately comes down to what people have as a collective sense of what they deem unfair, which is somewhat subjective.

On a non-legal side note, God definitely considers homosexuality wrong, though he still loves homosexual people. The word of marriage has theological impact for lots of Americans (destroying a marriage is a sin), and thus they are going to define marriage as God does, and very much don’t want to support anything that communicates marriage to be anything else. Many nonreligious people similarly object on similar, though more subjective grounds.

“In addition to the fact that you’re trying to legislate away a target group’s rights, this statement is incredibly flawed logic from its core. In the same way that being African American or a woman is not a choice, being attracted to someone of the same sex is not a choice, because if it were who would choose to be discriminated against?”

Even if same sex marriages were not allowed, nobody’s forcing gays to get rid of their partner. You could also still legally protect the gay couples by giving them basically the same rights as the married men and women have, no? Maybe not the same cultural status as marriages have – but that would be difficult even if gays have a right to marry.

If there already are married gay couples in California, those unions couldn’t be made illegal just like that. Probably they would be changed to registered partnerships, and such unions could guarantee practically all the same rights as marriages have.

As to culture and values, and which ever way the Proposition 8 goes, you simply cannot change the values of other people. You have to realize that a majority of people, worldwide, still believe and will believe that a marriage is primarily an institute meant for heterosexual couples. It is also not discriminating to think so, and people have every right to such values as much as gays have rights to their values – as long as they respect others and give them their freedom to live their lives as they wish.

Children are also a rather natural part of marriages, even if some married couples may not have kids. You have to remember the rights of children too when discussing marriage and related laws. Would it be ok, if all gay couples were allowed to adopt all the children they may ever wish? Or would a family where there would be both a mother and a father still be considered better? Can gay marriages really be equal to heterosexual marriages in that respect? Many specialists see that ideally children should have both a mother and a father, a male and a female role model in the family. In a natural, biological family that is also always the case, but not in a homosexual family, how ever good those gays might be with children. In that sense a gay family that has children can never be considered a natural and ideal family, I’m afraid. Gay couples simply are different from heterosexual couples. Why should they be considered just the same then?

I am part of the majority that believes that marriage should between one man and one woman.

Immorality and sexual deviation should never be allowed to become acceptable in our society.