oh... you mean they lied to the voters, I see.

It's true, just look at Massachusetts. There have been many reports of children being taught in school that the gay lifestyle is perfectly acceptable. It's one thing to feel that way yourself, but it should not be taught to young children at schools. They can decide if that is good or bad for themselves when they are older, but shouldn't be indoctrinated with that as elementary school children.

They do not teach it in Massachusetts. Where did you hear that, from Palin, Beck or Limbaugh?

Look, the confusion here is that many people are of the opinion that being gay is an issue of morality. It is not. It is an individual issue of sexuality. And in my opinion, it is a civil right. No religion should have to have gay marriage within it, but the government ought not being telling people who they can love and choose to share life with. Time to stop being so judgmental.

Furthermore, in my opinion, civil rights ought not be subject to a vote. Either there is a right or there is not. It would be akin to having voters decide if people of different races or religions should be allowed to marry. In the South they would have voted to not allow it, but if it is a civil right it should not be up to the majority, Our Constitution is designed to protect the minority (whether it is their religion, speech or race).

Scaring people that their children or grand children will be indoctrinated in schools and turned gay is simply shameful and immoral.

"Look, the confusion here is that many people are of the opinion that being gay is an issue of morality. It is not. It is an individual issue of sexuality."

Thats your personal opinion and you haven no right to force everyone who wants to marry to share that opinion or not be able to marry.

"And in my opinion, it is a civil right."

There is the problem that many people have. Marriage is not a civil right. It is a document issued by the state and heterosexuals who believe its a sin should not be forced to be issued a license by a state that issues licenses to commit sin. That's what you don't get.

"Furthermore, in my opinion, civil rights ought not be subject to a vote."

And those who don't like it will either change their religious and moral beliefs to conform to yours or they can choose not to get married by a state which performs gay marriages even if they believe it is a sin or maybe you think they can still get married by the priest who performs gay marriage. I misspoke when I said priest and not state

"Scaring people that their children or grand children will be indoctrinated in schools and turned gay is simply shameful and immoral."

Thank you for sharing your religious and moral belief on this subject since that is what your entire belief is about.

It is about forcing your religious and moral belief about what is and isn't sinful upon EVERYONE.

If people don't agree with you that homosexuality is not a sin and that it is not a sin to have a priest or state who performs those gay marriages to perform your heterosexual marriage then they are fine.

They can marry too but if they don't change their belief to yours then they are unable to marry.

As an atheist your shameful and immoral line doesn't change my opinion that you are a fascist who wants everyone to believe the same as you do about gay marriage or they can choose not to marry but the choice they have is between believing what you believe or not getting married because it is a civil right to marry a person of the same sex and anyone who disagrees will conform their religion to yours.

Alerting parents that their children will be indoctrinated that deviant lifestyles are OK is not immoral - the deviant life styles are what is immoral.

There are over 250,000 children being raised by homosexual individuals and couples. These children live in every state of the nation. There is a relatively good chance that, at some point in time, your child(ren) will attend school with a child who is being raised in a homosexual-headed household.

Your children will be exposed to same-sex relationships at school - merely because they exist in reality.

By not allowing the parents in these families to be married, we are placing their children at risk. If the parent-partner becomes incapacitated, the other partner may not have the right to continue to raise the child - causing the loss of both parents. If the relationship ends, the non-parent partner has no obligation to continue to provide for the financial well-being of the child - increasing the chance of the child living in poverty and receiving state aid.

Additionally, our children learn that not all families have married parents and marriage is not really that necessary or important.

Disallowing same-sex marriage does nothing to keep awareness of homosexuality out of schools and promotes the idea that marriage is outdated.