Marriage Equality is all about the right to Civil Marriage and has nothing to do with the religious rite of marriage or the actions of religious institutions.
Attack efforts towards some bakers demonstrate a new tactic in the battle against LGBTQ Equality. They are designed to confuse the public about the purpose of non-discrimination laws and perpetuate a myth of Christian persecution.
Being gay or lesbian isn’t a choice. What gays and lesbians do choose is to accept themselves and embrace being who they are. And some of us choose to marry.
Should the cost of fighting same-sex marriage be a reason why states give up the battle or is it worth any cost?
Courts do not decide to implement same-sex marriage and force it upon states. Courts do rule on the question of if the states laws or constitutional bans are a violation of the Federal constitution.
Contrary to Jennifer’s dilutions, same-sex couples are doing more to promote marriage and strengthen the institution of marriage! This is evidenced in the first linked post by Stephanie- a woman who found attending a marriage for a same-sex couple strengthened her own marriage to her opposite sex partner.
In regards to Wayne’s letter, free speech entitles people to say really stupid stuff sometimes. But when this is all they have, it is clear that the future for gay, lesbian bi, trans and queer people is getting better by the day.
In other words, the State of Indiana must control marriage, because if they didn’t, heterosexuals will have sex and make babies by mistake. Since same-sex couples don’t make babies by mistake, they don’t need to get married?
Could someone please cite what marriage equality activist ever insisted marriage wouldn’t affect anyone? Because it never happened! No one ever suggested such a thing! What marriage equality activists said then and now, is that allowing same-sex couples the ability to protect their relationships as and their families with civil marriage wouldn’t harm any heterosexual marriage. That’s a really big difference.
Should efforts and resources be spent towards getting marriage equality accepted at the ballot box? Do you think there will be repercussions in the form of more restrictive legislation following a Supreme Court win similar to what happened following Roe v Wade?