I made this point on another web site, but it bears repeating here.

The real question is why should anyone give a damn about two people of the same sex being recognized as married under the law? If that can't be answered without resorting to theology or morality based on religious principles, then it's illogical to even try and prevent gay marriage.

The problem is that the political desire to protect the "sanctity" of marriage is based entirely on moral principles, which are derived from Judeo-Christian teaching and mythology. Unless I'm mistaken, that is a clear violation of church and state.

They say that one of the leading causes of divorce is money. This of course can be traced to key issues like the ones you point out; lack of decent child care, health care, overwhelming debt because of declining wages and job insecurity. If they want to protect marraige they should address these issues that tear apart families and couples just to pad a few pockets.

I tried to post a response to your site but it would not let me due to 'questionable content'. There was not a single objectionable term in the post. However there were references to God, and faith as I tried to explain the foundations for the argument. After looking around the website, I noticed your affiliation and/or support of witchcraft , pagan worship and the ACLU. So no doubt the 'offensive' terms were those to 'Him'. If anyone wants to hear what I tried to post, emial me. I cut and pasted it to a Word doc.

I'm sorry you had a problem with leaving a post at my blog. The problem is likely due to some overly broad definitions that I have in my mt-blacklist because of the amount of "comment spam" (comments left for no reason other than to post links to commercial websites) that I've been getting. I thought I had cleared all of them back out when I was first alerted to the problem by another poster, but apparently I haven't gotten them all.

I assure you, though, none of the terms included would be religious terms. In looking around the site, you should have noticed that many other posters have left comments with terms related to Christianity and the Christian God with no problem at all.

Please feel free to send a copy of your comment to me by e-mail, and using that, I can go through the mt-blacklist and figure out what word IS causing the problem and correct it - after which I will gladly post your comment to this message, whether I agree with it or not.

"spritual"

Ask yourself this question: if I had to give up my child to be raised by one of two couples who's economic, spritual (if you care about that), moral and kindness levels were exactly the same - their only difference was that one couple was a man and woman and the other was a man and man (or woman and woman). Which couple would you want your child raised by? It seems simple to me that children are at a disadvantage being raised in fatherless or motherless households - which is already a huge problem as a result of rampant divorce. Elevating gay unions to the same level as non-gay ones is not rational. No one should be limiting financial rights to any stable couple however pretending homo. and hetero. relationships are of equal benefit to society is not a positive solution. This country needs to debate and vote on this issue, it cannot be left up to the whim of biased judges and a civil disobidient minority. I don't think the amendment will pass but I think it will elevate this issue to national debate instead putting us at the mercy of a minority that doesn't wish to justify itself - for that I thank our president.

Sorry about that last post. Apparently you cannot put the word "ho" + "mo" + "se" + "xual" in a post. HAHA...