Has all the people who voted for Bush considered that gay marriage will not have an affect on our children fut
105401
no they haven't.  Most of them think that any controversial law passed that contradicts their way thinking is going to cause this country to go to "hell in a handbasket".  Trust me, even if it were to become legal in the entire U.S. , you wouldn't see bunches of kids lining up to be "gay".  It's just silly paranoia on their part.
199651
Sorry this is a long one, but ignorant people make me so I think that most people are accepting of homosexuals today, but they aren't gung ho about accepting it.  I accept homosexuals for who they are and think they should have the right to marry.  I have gay friends and see no problem with their lifestyle.  However I'm not about to go protest in favor of it.  Not because I'd be embarrassed, but because I'm way too lazy to protest for anything.  Whereas we've all seen the bible thumping lunatics in the streets screaming to keep certain rights away from people they don't agree with.  They're too stupid to realize gay people are born that way, because if they admitted it they'd have to admit the bible is wrong, and at that point their whole foundation of life would crumble.  They're idiots who base their lives off of a fictional book(the bible).  If there was ever a proposition or something that I a voter could vote on directly, you'd have my vote.  People in love should be able to marry regardless of who they're in love with.  This is one straight man who is giving you his vote.
65621
I feel gay marriage will be abused just like any other law *permitting something*. Friends will marry to share in financial and tax benefits, they will marry out of a joke. For example me and my friend Mike were waiting for marriage to open up in our state and be the first married same-sex couple in school (highschool at the time). So as much as there are serious issues with gay marriage it will be abused but should still be granted.
856403
I'm not sure if it is gay people that you do not like or democrats???? Gay people are just people like you or me. Democrats currently have some pretty good ideas. I voted for quite a few this election. Not because of their party affiliation but based on each individuals agenda. Conservatives are generally against gay marriage, rights etc. That does not always mean that they are republicans. Peace.
1126896
Anyone who says "boo" about this gay marriage issue is instantly labeled  a hate monger.  The truth is, the gay movement is causing a lot of trouble in their quest.  It can only harm our society in a myriad of ways.  They, as usual, are being selfish.\n\nPlease view www.homosexualityexplained.com
723036
Well, aren't they already doing that with immigration and the ever election-looming issue of gay marriage?  (Note how we don't talk about gay marriage until it's election time...)
1028554
Of course not. God gave people free will. Politics caused the Senate to reject a ban on gay marriage
298235
No.  The federal government is currently run by morons who are afraid to legitimize gay marriage because they are under the dilusion that it might somehow impact the Church (even though the religious and legal institutions of marriage are totally and completely separate and any Chuch can refuse to marry anyone they want for any reason they want).  Same-sex partnerships essentially have no legal status in the US, so their existence is virtually irrelevent to the immigration process.  It's not fair but that's the way it is.
997783
Let's see, in 2004 Bush ran promising a gay marriage amendment. He got elected, and when he announced his post-election agenda, gay marriage wasn't even on it! Now, 2 years later, it's an election year, and the Congress is talking about gay marriage. And, of course, flag-burning. They trot this little horse and pony show out every two years, take a vote that doesn't pass for a problem that doesn't exist, and then smugly act like they are uber-patriots, instead of merely incompetent lawmakers.\n\nHonestly, I don't think there has been a single incident of flag-burning in 30 years. How dumb would you have to be to think this is an important issue? Of course, how dumb would you have to be to vote Republican to begin with?
177964
i saw this really interesting show (daytime talk show)(could've been oprah...)in which people with different stances on gay marriage spoke their minds. the guy who really left an impression on me was an older gay man (40-50)who said he was with the same man for like 20 yrs or something and he in no way had any desire to ever marry,  period. obviously it wasn't a fear of commitment, he simply stated that marriage is a union between a man and a woman and so he was not a part of that equation. he also said, in lieu of the insurance arguments(ie: not being able to acquire insurance through your partner because your union is not recognized by the law), get a job! i thought this to be kind of bold because in some instances you have people with disabilities in relationships with others who are capable of going to work every day and insuring them; but if they are in a state that doesn't acknowledge gay marriage, they are in a state of S.O.L., if you know what i mean... i think that it's a shame when two devoted partners can't enjoy the feeling of finality that i felt once i became married. and the divorce rates are so high i don't know why the conservatives are so concerned with whether or not gays marrying threatens the sacredness of marriage. nothing really is sacred anymore (don't mean to sound hopeless but let's face it) babies are having babies, every day people make empty promises to each other and "god", and every day people break them. people go on t.v. and advertise "i'm hot and want to marry someone rich and hot" selling them selves, but 2 people with legitmate feelings for one another are not allowed to cement their union with a formal term and ceremony... just doesn't seem right at all... just sharing my thoughts, great question though!\nhave a good day!
1144136
My opinion: the Democrats have not had a strong, charismatic candidate for President since Clinton, and have had the same problem with many Senatorial and Congressional elections. Also the Republicans have been very good about their "market research" and know the right issues to promote, to get their candidates elected. I do not care for George Bush and most certainly did not vote for him, but his public relations and strategy planning teams do an amazing job.  They are always first to bring up "hot" issues, things that people get heavily emotionally involved, and have done a nice job of picking some issues that really have no deep impact on the country but are guaranteed to rally supporters.\n\nFor example, gay marriage... now, in the grand scheme of things, unless you are a gay person who wants to get married, gay marriage is not going to change your life. Most companies offer domestic partner benefits already so your insurance won't go up, and if the gay guys down the street have a wedding, that won't magically turn you gay too. But it's a very hot issue and people who oppose gay marriage will be very loyal to a candidate who does too. And don't get me wrong--- I support gay marriage but I know it won't change my life one bit (except I guess I will have to buy some wedding gifts!).\n\nI do think there will be a Democratic turn in the mid-term elections but that may also be wishful thinking on my part. Many Republican candidates are distancing themselves from the President, where they usually would bend over backwards to have the President on the campaign trail with them. Whether or not the Democrats take advantage of how the Republicans are falling from favor is another story, though!\n\nPS The Supreme Court is leaning towards the Conservative side now but that's an appointed position, not an elected one, so we can thank all those who voted for Bush for that...
24769
Well, given that I’m gay I would have to say yes.  \n\nI find the arguments against gay marriage, and therefore gay rights, like the ones stated above amusing.  Yes marriage is the building blocks of the family unit, so why are literally hundreds of thousands of families across the country not extended the same rights of marriage?   \n\nThe original purpose of marriage was procreation, yes.  This in no way excludes gay couples.  Many use artificial means to have children (as many sterile straight couples do), and many more adopt children.  Others already have children from previous marriages.    Also, I don’t see anyone arguing that old people, and people who are sterile, shouldn’t be allowed to get married.  We also do not make people fill out forms declaring that they are planning to have children when they get married.  That’s because beginning in the 20th Century marriage stopped being centered around procreation and started being about love.  \n\nI also love the slippery slope argument mentioned above: “But, if we let men get married to men, what’s going to stop a man from trying to marry a horse?”  This has some variations, from trees, to horses, to dogs, to polygamy.  Well, to start I would like to point out that neither trees nor horses have been granted rights by the constitution.  Also, if everyone is so tolerant of gay people, and many are quick to point out that they have gay friends, why do we immediately associate gay marriage with bestiality and polygamy?  \n\nUnfortunately, my civil liberties are severely hindered by the fact that I can’t get married.  If my partner gets sick, there is no law protecting my rights to visit him in the hospital; if he dies, there is no law saying I have any rights to our owned property because as far as the government is concerned, “our property” doesn’t exist.  If children get involved this gets even uglier and more complicated.  There is more than one case on record of judges taking children away from a surviving partner and giving them to an ex-husband or ex-wife who has no connection to the child, simply because the surviving parent “had no legal connection to the children.”  This is all directly connected to the fact that we can’t get married.\n\nSo, I’m afraid people can’t have it both ways.  If you support gay rights, as I do, you have to support gay marriage.  Without gay marriage, we’re second class citizens, and are only accorded the rights of second class citizens.
1054559
The Ban Gay Marriage law is wrong.  Bush said it himself, people should be able to choose how they live.  That should include the gays too.  I didn't think the Senate had the power to veto a law, I thought only the president did.  I never learned much as far as all that goes, but I still believe that gays should be treated equally.
1022784
No, No and No.  Right now, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and James Dobson are crowing in delight over the rift  the right has caused. They practically come out and say Bush's election was their victory.\n  Bush was advised very carefully on this sticky wicket and, again, as with gay marriage and immigration pulled off a diversionary tactic to divide us and take attention off the greater issues.  God guides him, so he says. We know he uses God.  And the sooner the Christian Right wakes up, the better
940499
Yes they will!\nHere's some logic. It's a little bit complex for my conservative friends out their so listen carefully.\nIf homosexuality not equals (!=) immoral then gay marriage != immoral.\nHomosexuality != immoral, therefore gay marriage != immoral.\nError, bible != 100% true, failure to change above statement.
540693
No, it is not true.  There are people from both parties that do not believe in the gay life style.  However, there are more Republicans who do not believe in it, because Republicans tend to be more conservative and traditional in what they believe.
1002436
no... men and women who fail to take their vows seriously and bail out..the first sign of trouble are to blame.. along with those who marry for the wrong reasons.  stop blaming gays for every thing  ... or bush...  we need to take some responsibility for our own lives.  i worry about people so pre-occupied with gays,