[scripter]

We're doing what we can. In the mean time, children are attending public school and being taught gay is okay. Our kids will never attend a public school, but they'll work along side those who did.

Homosexuals already have all the benefits of marriage without the name.

Since science says homosexuals are not born that way, and there's a growing ex-gay population, changing the definition of marriage for 2% of the population is more of a social experiment than anything else.

A social experiment that the CDC, year after year, reports that MSM (Men have Sex with Men) are the least healthy in the nation and who spread a deadly, contagious disease, should be encouraged to continue their behavior? And you voted to encourage this behavior...

You should read the links I provided.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

"that MSM (Men have Sex with Men) are the least healthy in the nation"

I don't believe that it is entirely coincidental that the CDC demographic mentioned above has the same acronym as the Main Stream Media. :-(~)

[nufsed]

It doesn't matter what homosexuals already have. It is not for you to judge that people are okay and shouldn't marry because they're doing all right.

The problem with school curriculum already exists and gay marriage is not creatinjg that situation. The issue is that young kids should not be taught moral or sexual content withour parental approval.

Kids already see gay teachers hug before and after school and pictures of "partners' on their desks. they see gay couples holding hands in public. How will you protect your children from that?

The answer is in school choice. Banning gay marriage will not solve that problem. It will merely put in our constitution a restriction of a liberty.