Screw that.

Let’s just agree that you are un-American and opposed to legal equality for all citizens and save the rest.

Brown v. Board of Education. Separate but equal is NOT equal. Separate but equal is UNconstitutional. And immoral.

Period.

Your religious views are yours. Period. They don’t belong in civil law. Period.

And if you expect people to accept inequality peacefully or quietly and to continue to endure the secular government punishing us because of your religious views, think again, pal.

Why should I pay taxes if I am unequal under law???

Why should I accept it — for *your* sake?

Think again.

Until the philosophy that holds one group superior and another inferior is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned, it’s war.

Period.

You’re in my prayers. No one wants to withhold equality from you, but not only do YOU wish to do that to ME, you want me to accept it. Which means that in addition to being un-American, your position is INSANE.

If what you say is so — it patently is not — then hets who marry in courthouses should be limited to civil union. And church weddings should hold NO legal status.

If you get civil marriage, so should I. That’s the American way. Otherwise, America is a vile, mendacious construct.

And let’s be honest: You don’t want equality; you want SUPREMACY. And that is just evil on every level. Shame on you.

Do I sound rude? I am not taking anything from you, buster. And I refuse to kowtow to your ilk anymore. I’ve had it.

My family supports marriage as a religious term that declares that one man and one woman have joined as one before God and their church membership. If the term marriage is used outside of it’s original religious intent, then government is diluting a religious act.

All of my family members feel that some gays want the term “marriage” so much that they do not pursue the much more attainable solution of social unions performed under state law and outside of the church. Such a union could quickly be available in all states where as “gay marriage” is going to take a lot longer in places like the south.

I have another minority group in my family, Quakers. I have an observation about the minority members of my family, one group invites an invasion and the other group would require some converts in order to repopulate itself. How do gays become parents? If one or both would agree to carry a fetus to term I would have more warm feelings towards gays. What would happen to a country composed of only gays or Quakers? One group can not replace the population of the country and the other group can not defend it, yet my family has done both. My family members agree that a country could not survive if it were composed of only either of these two minorities.
Viel Gluck to all

The only precedent being established here by this abomination of a court is that the will of the people can evidently be easily overturned. This is why judges should be elected, and why judicial nominees should have terms associated with their position.

You have also foolishly and ignorantly assumed that “hate” is the motivating premise of those against a societal sanctioning of “marriage” between homosexual couples. Nice try. It is the opinion of many that such sanctioning weakens the foundational structure of society, and sanctions behavior that, although people in a free society are free, is in itself fundamentally destructive to society as a whole. There is no serious person who believes “pursuit of happiness” to be without condition.