As Ed said, in an ideal world, there would be no government involvement in marriage; churches could marry people, and civil officials could conduct civil unions, and both would provide the same benefits and penalties

I am so sick of this argument! Because homosexuals want to “marry” heterosexuals can no longer say they are “married” if they choose to utilize a Justice of the Peace? Nope, they can create and raise children together but because they didn’t have a church ceremony they’re not married, but gays who cannot procreate but can find a church to marry them are?

Again, may I emphasize that I wish you well and have never ever used derrogatory names to refer to homosexuals and have roundly condemned those who do—and I’ve done that to their face. Pardon me, but you are aware I’m sure that a conservative gay is an anomolie. I do not want to be part of an institution which so reduces MY humanity to the name gays call me and all women: BREEDER. – Portia46 on November 8, 2012 at 9:43 AM

I do not understand your point at all. You don’t like being called a breeder by some stupid, gay radicals? Just look at what I have been called on this board. I do not use the term breeders. I do not use vulgar language to describe anyone. And, I treasure my nine nieces and nephews. I only wish I could have had children.

You think that there are only a few gay conservatives such as myself. You are mistaken. There are far more of us than you might believe.

As I have stated, I have gone through mental hell in my life. It took a full-fledged mental breakdown and near suicide for me even to come out of my self-imposed closet and start talking about my sexuality at the age of 56. As I have said, I remained celibate all throughout those 56 years and was a semi-recluse with very few friends. I had to deal with anxiety and depression. That mental breakdown and coming out and to just begin to talk about it was the best thing that ever happened in my life. Finally, I don’t want gay teenagers and young adults to have to go through what I have gone through. But, there will always be people who will be attacking people such as myself. I understand that is just the way it is always going be.

Again, may I emphasize that I wish you well and have never ever used derrogatory names to refer to homosexuals and have roundly condemned those who do—and I’ve done that to their face. Pardon me, but you are aware I’m sure that a conservative gay is an anomolie. I do not want to be part of an institution which so reduces MY humanity to the name gays call me and all women: BREEDER.

Good for you. There won’t be an immediate implosion and I’m sure there are many others like you, and like my abhorance about killing late-term babies, I’m sure I’m merely old fashioned but 40 years ago, I didn’t sign up for this redefined institution and am not sure I want to be part of it. We just need to learn what we call outselves under these new rules. – Portia46 on November 7, 2012 at 4:44 PM

I am against abortion as a means as birth control and most certainly against late term abortions. As for your question, “We just need to learn what we call ourselves under these new rules.” Nothing changes for you, you are still married …………………. just as you have always been.

Now we have to figure out what to call our relationship and how to check those boxes asking about our marital status on forms. – Portia46 on November 7, 2012 at 11:47 AM

What is so difficult about this, you still have a marriage. You check the same box you have always checked.

That’s funny… I never felt like my marriage was threatened or diminished whenever a state approved gay marriage. Kristi and I are still a married couple, whether we live in Texas or Maryland. We’re raising two happy, healthy kids, and our family is going strong.

Has Iowa imploded yet? No? I rest my case. (And I do have ancestral ties to Iowa, so what goes on there DOES matter to me.)

TMOverbeck on November 7, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Good for you. There won’t be an immediate implosion and I’m sure there are many others like you, and like my abhorance about killing late-term babies, I’m sure I’m merely old fashioned but 40 years ago, I didn’t sign up for this redefined institution and am not sure I want to be part of it. We just need to learn what we call outselves under these new rules.

I chose the same path until I was 33. I pleaded with God each day to change me. It’s awful to live in loneliness and shame. Few people can understand it, so I want to congratulate you and wish you much happiness. – GMO on November 7, 2012 at 4:01 PM

I wish you well, too. I know what you have gone through.

“So pass laws safeguarding the rights of religious organizations and churches – planted firmly on the First Amendment – and enforce those laws already in effect against lewd behavior. But let the gay couples have their benefits.

By the way, I know plenty of gays & lesbians who just want the marriage equality and not any part of a hardcore agenda that some gay extremists are demanding. – TMOverbeck on November 7, 2012 at 1:48 PM

As a gay conservative I will be more than happy will vote for such laws.

I don’t know why I am gay and I certainly did not choose. I did not even experiment. I chose celibacy, silence and reclusiveness until I finally had a mental breakdown and nearly committed suicide five years ago. Then I came out of the closet to my close friends and associates. It was the best thing I ever did for my mental health. Everyone of them accepted me for who I am.

SC.Charlie on November 6, 2012 at 1:46 PM

I chose the same path until I was 33. I pleaded with God each day to change me. It’s awful to live in loneliness and shame. Few people can understand it, so I want to congratulate you and wish you much happiness.

It’s silly I know, because I believe God is the only arbiter that counts as regards what was once called marriage, but as a resident of Maryland, even in the face of total economic disaster, the one thing that brought tears was the fact that all my husband and I have gone through in keeping our marriage together for what we thought were the right reasons has been trivialized and repudiated by the state and by our neighbors. Now we have to figure out what to call our relationship and how to check those boxes asking about our marital status on forms.

Portia46 on November 7, 2012 at 11:47 AM

That’s funny… I never felt like my marriage was threatened or diminished whenever a state approved gay marriage. Kristi and I are still a married couple, whether we live in Texas or Maryland. We’re raising two happy, healthy kids, and our family is going strong.

Has Iowa imploded yet? No? I rest my case. (And I do have ancestral ties to Iowa, so what goes on there DOES matter to me.)

All the live-and-let-live people miss this, but same sex marriage proponents are not live-and-let-live at all. They are demanding approval. If they get same sex marriage in force, they intend to use those laws to “win” their argument.

There Goes The Neighborhood on November 6, 2012 at 5:32 PM

So pass laws safeguarding the rights of religious organizations and churches – planted firmly on the First Amendment – and enforce those laws already in effect against lewd behavior. But let the gay couples have their benefits.

By the way, I know plenty of gays & lesbians who just want the marriage equality and not any part of a hardcore agenda that some gay extremists are demanding.

As for gay issues, the States of Maine and Maryland have passed laws allowing gay marriage. The Minnesota initiative to define marriage as only between a man and women in their constitution, right now, is too close to call. We will all have to wait until the final vote is in. But it looks like it will not pass.

SC.Charlie on November 7, 2012 at 6:23 AM

Congradulations. Seriously. I wish you well but then I never wished you harm and be assured that I have never done harm to any homosexual.

It’s silly I know, because I believe God is the only arbiter that counts as regards what was once called marriage, but as a resident of Maryland, even in the face of total economic disaster, the one thing that brought tears was the fact that all my husband and I have gone through in keeping our marriage together for what we thought were the right reasons has been trivialized and repudiated by the state and by our neighbors. Now we have to figure out what to call our relationship and how to check those boxes asking about our marital status on forms.

As for gay issues, the States of Maine and Maryland have passed laws allowing gay marriage. The Minnesota initiative to define marriage as only between a man and women in their constitution, right now, is too close to call. We will all have to wait until the final vote is in. But it looks like it will not pass.

No issues ever come up between husbands and wives that a government might have to resolve.

There Goes The Neighborhood on November 6, 2012 at 6:06 PM

There isn’t a single issue that would ever come up between a husband and a wife that the government might have to resolve. Not a single one.

“SC.Charlie adopts a very palestinian approach to History…

The Modern Homosexual Culture has adopted this approach because as a group they lack traditions that bind most cultural groups over time and so they are in a state of re-invention to achieve a specific objective and recognition of an adopted identity.

One mechanism is the distortion of definitions,facts and interpretation of history… – workingclass artist on November 6, 2012 at 7:42 PM

It is time for you to get and education. Israel is the best nation in the Middle East when it comes to gay rights. Please read the following link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Israel ………. From the article, ” Common law marriage [in Israel] which grants most of the official marriage rights to the spouse has been achieved, but full official same-sex marriage has not yet been sanctioned. However, same-sex marriages performed elsewhere are recognized.” As I have said before, sometimes I wonder why the hell I waste my time posting on this board about this subject when there are people such as you posting on it.

“SC.Charlie adopts a very palestinian approach to History…

The Modern Homosexual Culture has adopted this approach because as a group they lack traditions that bind most cultural groups over time and so they are in a state of re-invention to achieve a specific objective and recognition of an adopted identity.

One mechanism is the distortion of definitions,facts and interpretation of history… – workingclass artist on November 6, 2012 at 7:42 PM

Sorry, but I am not distorting history. I am just stating the facts as I know them. I guess people such as yourself can’t handle the truth. Sometimes I wonder why the hell I waste my time posting on this board about this subject when there are people such as yourself.

“Only one person ever claimed that, and he was widely considered to hold a grudge against King James. No one else ever corroborated it. So this is not a fact at all, just a single he-said-he-said dispute.

Which makes me wonder just how true are all the other “facts” you throw out about who was and was not homosexual. – There Goes The Neighborhood on November 6, 2012 at 7:01 PM”

You obviously did not read the link I provided. I guess you wish to be remain uninformed about King James I of Great Britain. I majored in History in college back in the early 1970s. You might, also, like to look up and find out the facts about Frederick the Great and King Edward II of England. Edward II of England was murdered in a horrible fashion by people who obviously did not like his sexual orientation in a very horrid fashion.

Which makes me wonder just how true are all the other “facts” you throw out about who was and was not homosexual. – There Goes The Neighborhood on November 6, 2012 at 7:01 PM”

You obviously did not read the link I provided. I guess you wish to be remain uninformed about King James I of Great Britain. I majored in History in college back in the early 1970s. You might, also, like to look up and find out the facts about Frederick the Great and King Edward II of England. Edward II of England was murdered in a horrible fashion by people who obviously did not like his sexual orientation in a very horrid fashion.

If you will notice I did not say “all” societies. King James I of Great Britain was gay. Yep, remember the King James Bible was named after him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_relationships_of_James_VI_and_I

SC.Charlie on November 6, 2012 at 4:01 PM

Only one person ever claimed that, and he was widely considered to hold a grudge against King James. No one else ever corroborated it. So this is not a fact at all, just a single he-said-he-said dispute.

Which makes me wonder just how true are all the other “facts” you throw out about who was and was not homosexual.

There Goes The Neighborhood on November 6, 2012 at 7:01 PM

SC.Charlie adopts a very palestinian approach to History…

The Modern Homosexual Culture has adopted this approach because as a group they lack traditions that bind most cultural groups over time and so they are in a state of re-invention to achieve a specific objective and recognition of an adopted identity.

One mechanism is the distortion of definitions,facts and interpretation of history…

Oh and BTW, I know how the gay community likes to change history but I am sure that Ellen Corby’s husband would have been surprised to know that she was a lesbian. – melle1228 on November 6, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Sorry to tell you but she was involved with women. The ten year marriage was a marriage just like Rock Hudson’s marriage was a marriage.

SC.Charlie on November 6, 2012 at 3:43 PM

And both chose to adopt a dishonest and cynical abuse of the intention of marriage.

Your point is what exactly?

That both of these people were dishonest and lacked integrity?

That’s a bunch of fear mongering nonsense. Catholic churches won’t marry two non-Catholics, and will only marry a Catholic and a non-Catholic in certain circumstances. The fact that these marriages would be legal has not lead to the state compelling the Catholic church to perform them.

Mark Jaquith on November 6, 2012 at 3:24 PM

So it would be ok if the Church simply excommunicates all homosexuals? Since it/he/she would no longer be Catholic, then it would be ok to refuse to marry it/he/she.

See, we can all come to understandings!

Bulletchaser on November 6, 2012 at 3:37 PM

The official position of the Roman Catholic Church is the same as it has always been and is equal for both Gay and Straight catholics.

It is a sin to have sexual relations outside marriage.

It is an abuse of the purpose of sex and has a corrupting influence like other sins on the individuals involved and those that may be effected by it.

The Pope was clear…Homosexuality in and of itself is not sinful…Acting on the Homosexual inclination is, just as it is with fornication outside the institution of marriage.

The church urges compassion and faithful counseling for Homosexuals so that they have a healthy understanding of this position, just as an catholic is counseled on the sinful nature and consequences of fornication. Catholics are expected to be chaste as a virtue…whether they are gay or straight.

So the short answer is you don’t know, you’re just talking out of your you-know-what.

Dante on November 6, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Festus, Cato,Cicero, Augustus…you could start there.