Phil Cooke

What an incredible message. Thanks for noticing and bringing it forward for discussion.

If folks, especially Christians, can't see that this is the heart of Jesus' ministry here on Earth, then we just as well skip Christmas altogether.

"Read more" indeed, jgogek.  And when you do you'll find that historically, defining marriage as an institution between a man and a women has been a core belief for thousands of years – virtually since the beginning of humanity.  So to suddenly muck around with that, is a cause for serious reflection and consideration.  I don't devalue your situation. However, from my perspective (and the perspective of millions of others) the issue isn't focused as much about allowing the gay community to marry.  It's about changing an institution that has been such a vital cornerstone of civilization.  That's worth thinking about.  What a man and woman share together is different from what a man and man or woman and woman share.  In personality, physicality, temprement, and more.  But in the meantime, as Rick says, we can still love each other and respect each other's views.  After all, isn't that the "tolerance" the gay community has preached for so long?   

Hi jgogek,

I took your exhortation to read more.  From a legislative standpoint, both Blake v. Nelson in 1972 and Fernandez v. Robles in 2007 — cases that argued for same-sex marriage that were argued in the state Supreme Courts of MN and NY, respectively — ruled that Loving v. Virginia could not be applied to same-sex marriage, or any other definition of marriage outside man/woman.  Thanks for encouraging us to read more about this issue, even though it seems to only hurt your cause…

Nice sentiments and well expressed. But it does not really matter what you or I or anybody else things about the morality of gay marriage or whether the institution of marriage between man and woman must be protected to save Western Civilization. The fact is that the Supreme Court case Loving v. Virginia found that marriage is a fundamental civil right, and that the equal protection clause of the 14^th amendment guarantees that right to everybody regardless of race. (Some say that because the word “marriage” is not in the Constitutional, marriage is not a civil rights issue. But in the United States, the US Supreme Court decides what’s constitutional and what’s not, and the court does that through case law. In Loving v. Virginia, the court state clearly that marriage is a personal right.) Now, Loving v. Virginia said nothing about equal protection for gays and lesbians. But the California Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that equal protection for marriage applies to gays and lesbians. Proposition 8 did nothing to change that, and I believe it will be struck down for exactly that reason. Eventually, I believe that that the US Supreme Court will find that equal protection in the civil right of marriage applies to gays and lesbians. If the court is forced to take the issue head-on, it could only deny that right if justices find that there is an overwhelming harm to society by allowing gays and lesbians to marry. Bob (above) and his ilk will say that there is such a harm. I don’t think it can be proven. So, this is a long way of saying that it’s a civil rights issue. Our opinions on the morality, etc. of gay marriage have no bearing on the subject