Why is the governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts so against gay marriage? Do we have another(read details)?
922731
don't worry about him.\nhe is not electable as president.\n\nhe should represent the laws of his state\nand has chosen to oppose them.\nwonder if he had a kid come out of the closet,\nwould it change his views?\n\ngag!
850864
Congrats on coming out!!...Although I totally agree with gay people being allowed to marry, we have to examine the political climate of what we're dealing with.  Anytime another group is pushed into a corner they are gonna be on the defensive.  This is what's happening with gay marriage.  Christians (being riled up by the Republicans) feel it's an attack on the "sanctity" of marriage.  I won't even try to get into all the ironies of that statement, but it is in fact how they feel.  The gay community feels that a fundamental right is being taken away and so the push for legalized marriage intensifies.  \n\nThe only solution for this situation is for the gay community to back off for "marriage" and to push for civil unions.  Having all the same legal rights, benefits, and legal consequences (divorce) as marriage..but not calling it marriage.  This would be a true separation of church and state, it would ease the Christians minds of marriage being on the attack and essentially take away any arguing points on the issue. It would allow the gay community to benefit form what straight people have been enjoying for centuries.\n\nUnfortunately we live in such a political charged atmosphere that such compromises have to made to get a solution.  It isn't necessarily right...but it's the best way for us to realistically achieve our goal of legal rights.  If the marriage push continues by the gay community it's only going to cause increased tensions  and our ability to enjoy equal rights will be a long time away.
886315
Whaaaaaaaat?  Neil Patrick Harris is not gay... is he?\n\nHoly crap he is.\n\nhttp://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2006-11-04-doogie-gay_x.htm?csp=34\n\nHe can have a gay marriage, yeah, sure.  It may not be legal (unless he lives in Mass or New Jersey) but he sure can.
778747
Mitt Romney is the Governor of Massachusetts.
911046
I agree. I think it was Conservatives that switched Civil Unions to GAY MARRIAGE to freak out church goers to vote. Someday America will look back and regret their decisions just like they did with slavery, women and civil rights. This is clearly a violation of church and state. But I think that a grandmother and her caretaking granddaughter should be able to enter into a civil union to if they life together to enjoy the same rights. Family is more complicated these days then a man and a woman and the divorce rate will tell you that.\n\nI DON'T WANT GAY MARRIAGE!!!\nYou straight people can have it, sit on it, spin, and repeat three times.\n\nAND the fact the conservatives deny gay people marriage only further helps us to "corrupt your children" into polyamourous life styles, cause gay people are so "much cooler" role models. LIKE SEX IN THE CITY!!! and the whole metrosexual trend amoung straight huys so that they can get more punany and justify being players.\n\nOf course, some gays, but especially lesbians would benefit: Adoption, Inheiritance, Medical Insurance and Patient Rights, etc. So I do want Gay Marriage for them (Just not for me---at least at this point in my life).\n\nBut actually, here is a nifty solution:\nAbolish governement recognized marriages alltogether.\nYou get a CIVIL UNION at the Court House.\nYou get the Sacrement of Marriage at a Church.\n\nThen Priests and Ministers could be more selective and curb the divorce rate...But wait, that is how they make money by leaching off social needs. So why don't they let all those rich, over-embellishing, excessive-spending gay people get married and take their money???\n\nWell I am just as happy to keep my $ and my freedom!
1181686
Why not let two people that love each other get married? Being homophobic is no different than being racist.\nYes, that effects the way I vote.
1149594
Conservatives will always lean on non political issues(like gay marriage) whenever their feet are to the fire.  Bush is a lame duck.  His own party is turning against him, and he is pulling out all the stops to keep their loyalty.
392945
I have nothing against same-sex marriages. I think it's really stupid how the government is not allowing it in the US. We have the freedom of religion. Wouldn't that mean that we have the freedom to choose what sex our marriage partner is? This topic is purely religious, and what happened to "seperation of church and state"? For the land of the free, there are a lot of useless things restricting our freedom.
1019944
Congratulations! This is one of the best questions you have asked so far.\n\nThere is good news that the federal amendment did not pass. The bad news is that there are still plenty of states that already have passed amendments and laws banning gay marriage. Perhaps, with this being a states' issue, we will see another sad chapter (one that happened a little closer to home) repeat itself.\n\nUnfortunately, you are getting some bad responses from people who don't see what you are seeing. Massive genocide, or even something not as extreme, doesn't happen overnight. We are seeing the beginings of the religious right's attempt to divide Americans. It won't stop here. If they had their ways, marriage wouldn't be the only right not allowed to gays. They would also not stop at gays.\n\nWhat we are seeing isn't rasicm so people can easily look past it. They believe that people are gay by choice and that makes it easier for them to discriminate. They also believe that people are Muslim or Jewish or atheist by choice and they think that these people should change their ways.\n\nThe person who said history repeats itself is right. The more the religious right is allowed to control politics and our culture and divide Americans, the further away we will go towards allowing all people equal rights and equal freedoms.
784269
I won't get into the sin thing, since I'm a Humanist and that's a religious concept, but it does seem to me that, if one of the reasons societies promote marriage is to promote stability, then it doesn't make sense to discourage same-sex couples from marrying.  Denying gay couples the right to marry is not defending marriage.
1079364
If they love each other, why shouldnt they?  If two gay people who would totally honor marriage like it was meant to, shouldn't they be able to?  Why is it that a man and a woman can totally defile the purpose of marriage by making it some TV thing (who wants to marry a millionaire... or whatever), but two same sex people with a genuine commitment can't?\n\nAnswer to McFly:\n\nYa mind coming up with some real and logical why you think that, or are you purely motivated by ignorance?  have you ever actually sat down with a gay couple and bothered to understand them?\n\nAnswer to Blondie:\n\nSpoken to God directly lately have ya?  Whats his number... I'd love to ask him myself.
879812
I love that the first guy said he doesn't believe gays should have MORE rights than the average citizen. That gave me a good chuckle here at work.\n\nI live in Virginia, and voters today are deciding on the most unconstitutional and just plain hateful peice of legislation in the United States.  I think the amendment is drawing a lot of people to the polls. This amendment doesn't just ban gay marriage (gay marriage has been banned in Virginia for 30 years, so that would be redundant,) but it specifically disallows same parent adoption, hospital visitation rights, and rights of survivorship. Its been on the minds of Virginians for over a year now, and today we'll see.\n\nIf you aren't concerned about the way gays are being treated in this country, than you just aren't paying attention. Equal rights mean rights for EVERYONE.  That said, I'm about to pack up and move to Vermont. It might be cold, but at least I don't have to worry about my neighbors voting for legislation that takes away my power of attorney or my kids.
94416
the current hullabaloo is the hysterical last gasp of religious whackos trying to impose their own opinions on the rest of us. soon enough, the sham of the "ex-gay" movement will be widely known--because of the numbers of "failures." and as more and more people get to know perfectly normal gay folks, there will be fewer and fewer people who can find it in their heart to justify what is clearly illegal discrimination. and Pat Robertson won't have a leg to stand on when god doesn't smite down the countries who welcome and celebrate gay folks as full citizens. \n\ntwenty years ago, did anyone even think that gay marriage could be on the public agenda?
337470
I grew up in Taxachusetts.  Their entire delegation to the U.S. Congress is far-left Democrats, so your question is a very good one.  I've asked this of my family that still lives up there, because I was puzzled by it too.  What they tell me is that, despite their leftward bias, they still don't like paying high taxes, and they want a good economy.  So, at the state level, they have often elected moderately conservative Republicans for jobs like Governor, just to balance things out.  However, I don't think Romney is quite as conservative as you think on every issue.  He tends to be somewhat moderate on a few things, and that's what makes him palatable to voters up there.
157027
I personally think gay marriage is good.  People get married all the time, why shouldn't they be allowed to?  It's a personal choice and doesn't hurt anyone any more than it would if I got married.  It may even lower the divorce rate,since they tend to stay together longer than most straight couples, at elast from my experience.  The thing I found most ironic is Elton John went to England to get married.  Didn't we fight for freedom from England to be allowed to have our own lifestyles without persecution?  Then why ccan't gay couples have more than commencement ceremonies and enjoy the legal and financial benefits that come with any marriage?  I really don't have any information on why a gay couple shouldn't get married, Sorry.
1142718
Many voters and politicians are being bigots.  I have listened to radio talk shows and read tons of stuff on the Internet, and I have yet to see or hear an argument for banning gay marriage that makes sense to me.  I am a Christian.  I am against persecuting others and I expect to be persecuted.  Gay people being allowed to get married is not going to affect my heterosexual marriage one bit.  It is not going to affect my childrens' world views, but thinking that HATE is OK because it's officially sanctioned by the government might.  Let the church do as it will, but the state needs to allow minorities their basic civil rights.
979999
Took me a minute - I didn't know what state you are in......\n\nKay Bailey Hutchinson -Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)\nBarbara Ann Radnofsky -No constitutional definition of marriage. (Aug 2006) \nNo amendment defining one-man-one-woman marriage. (Aug 2006) \n Scott Lanier Jameson-No constitutional definition of marriage. (Oct 2006)  \nJohn Morris- no stand given on this issue\nKay Granger-Voted YES on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)\nGardner Osborne- no stand given on this issue