[Exton1]

Tyranny of the majority? This is Marxist Speech. It used to be called rule of the majority. What you are advocating is anarchy. You are a pervert that does not like the majority imposing any morality and/or personal preferences on an individual. The people of California voted that “Marriage” is between a man and a woman. How is that prejudice against homosexuals? The vote did not say marriage is between a heterosexual man and woman. Any homosexual can get married by finding someone of the opposite sex who will have them and the two will crate children.

What you and the other perverts want is recognition of a coupling between members of the same sex that HAS NEVER BEEN RECOGNIZED IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD. NOT ONE RELIGION RECOGNIES SAME SEX COUPLING. The truth is that society cannot survive if it does not have a stable family (man + women = children), it can get along just fine with out gays.

The children produced by a MAN-WOMAN relationship have a biological connection to both parents. In a so called GAY family the children will at most have a biological connection to only one parent, and in some case neither parent. Also studies have shown that children need both a father and a mother in order to grow up healthy and mentally stable. After thousand of years of proof that the normal family work, why should be experiment now with different family structures in order to appease less than 2% of the population?

Majority rule, is not necessarily a bad thing, especially if the Majority has a base in religious fundamentals.

[Texas Federalist]

Tyranny of the majority? This is Marxist Speech.

Actually, this is Madisonian speech. It is the basis for much of the Federalist Papers.

[tahiti]

"What you are advocating is anarchy."

How is advocating the supremacy of a constitution over laws and statutes, what we in the U.S. commonly call the "rule of law," be "advocating...anarchy?"