Just as in the times of the Spanish inquisition the religious right types want to mandate their beliefs. Folks Love is Love, commitment is commitment. Equal rights , for the people, those words should mean everyone. What consenting adults feel for each other should be celebrated. You loud minority may be that loud. We the people the majority have had enough of your lunacy.

I personally don’t believe in "marriage" for gay folks I do think that should be between a man and a woman, I do believe in civil unions for them with all the same rights as married couples.  I guess you can’t help who you fall in love with but we were made a different sex for a reason and basically to have children.  I suppose each state will have to decide what they think is right for them and change the laws accordingly.

The right can’t blame this one on activist judges. Should also point out that the California legislature passed gay marriage — twice — but our liberal Republican governor vetoed it both times.

I am distressed about events in Vermont, for the following reason.  In California, it is possible to put issues related to equal treatment under the law up for a simple majority vote of the mob, where as in Vermont, it proved to be the case that the legislature could not protect equal treatment under the law without a two-thirds vote of both houses.  (The vote was 23-5 to override in the state Senate and 100-49 to override in the House.)

With this in mind, remember what the Supreme Court of Iowa said in its recent ruling.
[ http://www.wowowow.com/cl/259515 ]
In concluding that the marriage statute under review was constitutionally infirm, the court stated:
We have a constitutional duty to ensure equal protection of the law.  Faithfulness to that duty requires us to hold Iowa’s marriage statute, Iowa Code section 595.2, violates the Iowa Constitution.  To decide otherwise would be an abdication of our constitutional duty.  If gay and lesbian people must submit to different treatment without an exceedingly persuasive justification, they are deprived of the benefits of the principle of equal protection upon which the rule of law is founded. Iowa Code section 595.2 denies gay and lesbian people the equal protection of the law promised by the Iowa Constitution.

What an absurd and horrifying situation: it is easy to target minority groups and strip them of protections enjoyed by others and difficult to protect fundamental principles “upon which the rule of law is founded”.
As suggested over here [ http://www.wowowow.com/cl/260190 ], if we would only consider what fundamental principles we support before considering banning this and banning that, political discourse and decision-making in this country would be simplified enormously.
The big question now is whether the California Supreme court will agree that minority groups should indeed be easy prey or whether they will agree instead with Iowa’s Supreme Court.  Even though none of these decisions will directly affect my marriage, I don’t believe anyone’s rights are genuinely safe unless everyone is afforded equal treatment under the law.

Thankfully, we are inching towards the day when I can once again say with some conviction, “This is a free country.”

Now even "Pastor Rick" Warren has backtracked on gay marriage, telling Larry King this week, "I am not an anti-gay marriage activist."

But as conservative gay columnist Andrew Sullivan points out, Warren may have broken one of the Ten Commandments when he said: 

During the whole Proposition 8 thing, I never once went to a meeting, never once issued a statement, never—never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop 8 was going.

For one thing, Prop 8 was launched in early 2008 and was over in November, not "two years." For another, here’s what Warren said in October:

By the way, the election’s coming up in a couple weeks and I hope you’re praying about your vote. One of the propositions, of course, that I want to mention is Proposition 8 which is the proposition that had to be instituted because the court threw out the will of the people. And a court of four guys actually, voted to change a defintion of marriage that has been going for 5,000 years.

Now, let me just say this really clearly "We support Proposition 8." And if you believe what the Bible says about marriage, you need to support Proposition 8. I never support a candidate but on moral issues I come out very clear.

This is one thing, friends, that all politicians tend to agree on. Both Barack Obama and John McCain, I flat out asked both of them "What is your definition of marriage?" They both said the same thing. It is the traditional, historic, universal definition of marriage: one man and one woman, for life. And every culture for 5,000 years, and every religion for 5,000 years has said the definition of marriage is between one man and a woman.

Now, here’s an interesting thing. Just, there are about 2 percent of Americans who are homosexual or gay/lesbian people. We should not let 2 percent of the population to change the definition of marriage that has been supported by every single culture and every single religion for 5,000 years.

This is not just a Christian issue. It’s a humanitarian and human issue that God created marriage for the purpose of family, love and procreation. So I urge you to support Proposition 8 and pass that word on.

So Pastor Rick lied? 

Couple of things: 5,000 years ago, the standard practice of marriage was polygamy. In fact, Abraham, the father of Judaism, Christianity and Islam was a polygamist, as were other many other major Old Testament figures.

Secondly, Alfred Kinsey, the pioneering sex researcher, said his studies show that around 10 percent, not 2 percent, of the population is gay. In any case, if gay people are only 2 percent, then why all the fuss? If gays are so insignificant why does it matter so much?

Finally, Obama opposed Prop 8, and said so publicly.

You’ll also find a video of  Warren making this statement here on YouTube.