ORIGINAL: Ct Dude

All Americans are supposed to have the right to pursue happiness and they are supposed to have equal protection under the law.  The right to enter into private contracts should exist for all Americans, be they gay or straight

You could also take this logic and apply it to a man and his sister or mother ( or any other family memeber) or , say, even his sheep.  Most people find any of these inmoral, but the guy and his sheep are just pursueing happiness in they our way, so who are we to say he is wrong?, strange yes, but with the above logic we can not say that he is “wrong”.

I am not against any one, gay or straight, who finds some one to love and spend the rest of their lives together, fine by me, but you can use a lot of different “logic” to apply here .

The difference is that marrying a brother to a sister is encouraging an incestuous relationship, the result of which may be a retarded mutant on whom the state ends up wasting a lot of money.  We already have one of those; he is our president.

As far as marrying a guy to several sheep, there would be issues of polygamy and cruelty to animals (I guess, unless the sheep really like it).  Plus, marriage is defined as a civil union between two people, not two mammals.

When a gay couple marries, no one suffers (except perhaps the couple).  There is no compelling reason to deny them the right to marry (and be just as miserable as a heterosexual couple), other than it is against the religious beliefs of some people.  A law banning gay marriage therefore violates the separation of church and state.  We should not allow the peculiar religious teaching of some religions dictate our laws.

Now, in many cases laws are written for perfectly good secular reasons, and the laws happen to be in compliance with religious teachings.  As long as there is a good secular reason for a law, it is fine that the law is upheld.