[bigsigh]

If I may. I've been conservative since I was 18 and started with Barry Goldwater and William Buckley.

Adults have the right to have sex with each other if both give consent.

People should not go to jail for having sex that offends others religious beliefs or because they think it's icky.

When the government gets involved in honoring contracts or bestowing benefits based upon being married, it should honor the contract between adults regardless of homo or hetero status. The government is not here to enforce religious beliefs or impose sexual morality upon the citizenery.

Two men or women marrying each other does not effect my marriage or morals one iota.

People have the right to select the marriage partner of their choice, as long as both are of legal age to enter into a contract or it does no physical harm to others.

Some people here are so hateful of homosexuality they lump any good for homosexuals under an agenda which was written by some extremist. If you say anything that isn't negative then they label you "pro-agenda." This is a sophomoric propaganda technique. There is a world of difference between NAMBLA and gay marriage. But those who are malicious or lazy just go for the agenda slur.

JR doesn't like homosexualism, whatever that is, but the rights of people apply wheteher or not they are homosexual. Some of these issues need to be taken issue by issue and not painted with a broad brush.

[JCEccles]

You've been an ultraliberal shill for the homosexual lobby since the day you showed up at FR. Few things are more destructive of traditional morality or corrosive to the traditional family and marriage that the gay rights agenda that you champion.

Conservatives don't applaud and advance schemes that rot the foundation of the nation. You are no conservative.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

People have the right to select the marriage partner of their choice...

You are a liar.

Marrige is a religious rite, not a civil right. It is a privileged practice and a public act that requires a statutory license...

Here is the case law:

"Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices..."

[Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 8 Otto 145, 24 L. Ed. 244 (1878).] See also: Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States, 136 U.S. 1, 10 S.Ct. 792, 34 L. Ed. 478 (1890). Revised as 140 U.S. 665, 11 S.Ct. 884, 35 L. Ed. 592 (1891).

[Paul C. Jesup]

bigsigh: but the rights of people apply wheteher or not they are homosexual. Some of these issues need to be taken issue by issue and not painted with a broad brush.

This pretty much sums up my feelings as well.