[Kickass Conservative]

Obama said that Gay Marriage is a States Rights issue.

Is he now saying that ONE STATE can dictate to the other FORTYNINE STATES that they must support Gay Marriage as well? Does this also mean that States with Laws against Siblings and First Cousins Marrying will have those Laws overthrown as well? How about Polygamy amongst consenting Adults. Where exactly does this madness end?

[Nowhere Man]

Is he now saying that ONE STATE can dictate to the other FORTYNINE STATES that they must support Gay Marriage as well? Does this also mean that States with Laws against Siblings and First Cousins Marrying will have those Laws overthrown as well? How about Polygamy amongst consenting Adults. Where exactly does this madness end?

Well, under our legal system, it is a States rights issue, it is up to the people of each State to decide. Myself I don't care what people do in private as log as they take responsibility for their actions and consequences thereof. I do understand the slippery slope here, I mean if you extend and redefine marriage at the desire of another group then how can you turn down others such as polygamists, people who want to marry animals, inanimate objects, themselves, etc. I can understand us losing a few states, some might get out of marriage entirely and so on, well, that is under our system in a legal sense. If you want to put a stop to this nationally and once and for all, we can do like the Serbians and Russians did where they amended their constitutions to define marriage as one man, one woman.

I just don't like it forced on us from the top and/or voted in to pacify them.

What I bemoan is the death of common knowledge and sense hoisted on the petard or political correctness. Back 20, 30, 40, 50 plus years ago, when you thin marriage, you think man and woman.

I have a couple of gay friends who consider themselves married. Deep down inside, if that's what they want to think, so be it, even if they want, draw up an agreement for a civil union, but don't force the marriage thing down our throats. If they want to change things, there is the process available although it is just as available to us to stop them. Again, we might end up having a mosiac of differing standards in each State so I guess we'd have to live in a State closest to our views.

Mark Davis on Rush made a good point where if this is accepted in all 50 States, then the differences between male and female will be nothing and we could see things like women getting drafted and so on.

I don't care what gays do as long as it is private, they have every right to pursue the American Dream too as they see fit but it should not be forced down our throats either. This is one barrel of monkeys that needed to remain closed.

[ecomcon]

Where exactly does this madness end?

Ther is no amicable solution. It's us or them.

Homos like to say they want "equality", but deep down, they consider themselves superior in every way. They reject God, and put themselves in His place. Thus their thoughts are little else but error, and destruction will be the result, one way or another. See: Sodom

[supercat]

Does this also mean that States with Laws against Siblings and First Cousins Marrying will have those Laws overthrown as well?

Some states permit first cousins to marry; others do not. I believe that even states which do not allow first cousins to marry would expect first cousins who took up residence after getting married elsewhere to file as a married couple.

On the other hand, there is something I find curious about "civil union" legislation--if it is supposedly about allowing people who are not eligible to be married to nonetheless receive non-sexual benefits like expedited probate, property divisions, hospital visitation, etc. why do civil-union laws specifically restrict it to unrelated persons? If it "isn't about sex", why shouldn't a brother and sister who share one roof (but not one bed) be able to designate that if one dies the other simply acts as the surviving household member as would be done with a spouse?