Should Vermont pass gay marriage bill?

So you may not like gay people getting married, but think of the economic stimulus it would be during these hard times! VT bakeries, photographers, venues, tailors, etc. all getting tons of work!

i think that gay marriage should happen. why? cuz im staying in Vermont all my life and i want to get married no matter who im marring male or female

we need peace and love and we need to respect every each person , it doesn't matter the sex of the person, as long its love between them. am 32 years old and i been with the same person for over 12 years and i would love to be able to get marriedon this lifetime!!!!!

I think Civil Unions agreements should be extended so that partners have all the rights that married people do. But, marriage should be between a man and a woman. At the very least, have a vote on this at town meetings, don't force it down my throat. If it's voted in by the majority of Vermonters, I could learn to accept it. But when it's done in the dark of the night, you lose more public trust and confidence (a message to Montpelier).

The UN Convention on the Rights of he Child (the most widely accepted treaty ever) states, "In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by ... courts of law ... or legislativebodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration..." And yet, throughtou this debate on rededining marriage, the concerns over the rights of children have been ignored - especially the basic human right to a mother and a father. Thirty states in the U.S. have passed constitutional amendments defining marriage as between one man and one woman, and all but six states have specific legal protections of that definition in eithr constitutional provisions or statute. All court decisions have shown themselves to be well within the framework of the respective state constitutions, as well as our U. S. Constitution. Vermont's civil unions already provide every legal benefit and protection VT can give! Civil unions did not change marriage, but same-sex marriage will! It will legally remake marriage to resemble the tragedy of a missing biological parent for any child residing with two parents of the same sex. Call the legislators and ask them to vote a resounding "NO" on the gender-neutral marriage bill in our state legislature!

Marriage should be between a man and a woman. The sticker worn by MANY on Monday in Montpelier read "Marriage 1 man, 1 woman.”

Children have a right to have a Father and a Mother! A father cannot be a mother to his child and a mother cannot be a father to her child. But, together they are united as ONE.

The Bible reads in Mark 10:7 that “For this reason a MAN shall leave his father and his mother and be joined to his WIFE ….

Don’t allow government to change what God himself has ordained!

"Believing in God is dangerous. Once you have faith, you no longer base your thoughts on reality. Then, any atrocity can be justified.
If your mind is being influenced by external source, ie: other people, then any concept you form in your mind is subject to any irrationalities and non sequiturs that those other sources have used.
Religion controls billions of people using concepts not based on reality. It tells people how to think, and what moral guidelines to follow. Worst of all though, it undermines the most basic concepts of reality, and becomes the entire foundation for one's thinking.
As a child, you see the world around you only in reality. It is all you know. However as you are exposed to religion by adults, your grasp on reality is instantly shattered. You no longer think by the same set of rules. By believing in something that cannot be proven, you now see the world through eyes of faith, and then, nothing is out of the bounds of possibility. From the moment your mind has faith, you no longer see reality."

So to base your decisions on someone that is not real is idiotic.

Vermont has already gone far enough in granting rights to gay people. They can live together in a civil union that is recognized by the state. I have several friends who are gay, one couple even went to Mass. to get married. that is their right. But, to change our laws to say MARRIAGE is no longer between male and female is totally out of reality. Even in nature you must have male and female to produce life. This is more than about equal rights for the homosexual. This is about changing society and our culture and making it even more dysfunctional than it is now. It is a known fact that children from divorced families (man and woman) suffer from separation anxities and all kinds of traumas. When a child has a mother and a father this child has a picture of a well-rounded relationship on how men and women are to relate to each other and then they can reproduce this life as well. True marriage between a man and a woman not only produces a child, it produces healthy loving bonds and makes for a wholesome culture. It is strange to hear people say religion and a belief in God in the worst thing for society. Without God's moral standards it is every man for himself, and each person sets up what they think is right in their own eyes. There is no correct standard at all and only anarchy reigns. Look at Hilter and what he believed. ( Not his misuse of his brand of Christianity, but his evolutionary satanic goal of producing the elite race). Anyone who detests the God idea is usually one who holds a great grudge against him whether they realize it or not. These people are abnormally full of hatred towards people who do believe in God. What is up with that. Can't they be tolerant?

I don't agree with the boost to the economy aspect as I have friends who do not want to become gender neutral "parties" at their weddings so will marry out of state. I do agree that civil unions could be modified to meet the needs of the gay folks who feel that they do not provide the same treatment as marriage. Questions: has anyone inquired with the IRS to see if this change in status will indeed make a difference on tax filing? Thought about Power of Attorney to make sure that they or their partner will be allowed to make decisions on their behalf? Or is this just a matter of "they have it, so I want it?"

Whether or not you believe in God and creation, you have to agree that men and women are made differently. Having been married for over 50 years to the same husband, we are thrilled to have a family of 4 generations. Several times while our children were growing up, my husband's job required him to be away from us for long periods of time. It was very obvious during those times how badly our sons and daughters needed both a father and a mother. A successful marriage takes a lot of work all our lives -- it doesn't just happen. Having a male and female for parents makes a big difference to children. A father cannot take the place of a mother and a mother cannot take the place of a father. I can assure you from our experiecne that children need the influence of both sexes. For this reason, I do not feel we should have same-sex marriage.

The Federal government does not recognize civil unions as "married filing jointly" for tax purposes. It can only be done within the state filing and must be recomputed.

There used to be a saying that "Everybody is doing it" and of course we know that it was a false buzz phrase. My perspective has always been that just because something is legal it does not mean that it is right. In our world we have what is legal and then we have ethics which is a higher set of unwritten rules.

Something may seem innocent when it may really be quite harmful. The unnatural affection of two men or two women is not without consequences both socially or spiritually.

God loves all of His creation and one sin is no different than the other to Him. His Word says in Galatians 6:7 the following:

"Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows."

We will find the mercy and forgiveness that only God can give through His only son Jesus, the Lamb of God.

Marriage between a one man and one woman is much more than just a thought dreamed up. One man and one woman happens to be exactly what it takes to bring a child into this world. So it really is not a coincidence that the most successful environment for raising children. Why shouldn’t a child be raised by the two people who together created that child? Why would we want anything different to be the goal of our culture? These are questions those pushing marriage away from its basis being on the wellbeing of children to merely a government certificate of perceived sexual attraction.

It is time adults acted like adults and put children’s needs before the desires of a small group of adults wanting greater acceptance of a lifestyle that is both unnatural and unhealthy. If the Vermont Legislature really want to demonstrate compassion toward those presently in this lifestyle and our younger Vermonters who are now challenged to consider such a lifestyle, they would pass policy that would discourage people from making such a choice, albeit a difficult choice for many. Real compassion cares. Real compassion looks into why some people have same-sex attractions. There is often a lot of pain and abuse that preceded such attraction. Real compassion would not just ignore that history. Shifting the meaning of marriage is covering up real issues and throwing compassion to the wind.

Marriage between a man and a woman was the first institution God created. Marriage was designed by God to be monogamous and permanent. From that came the home where children could be brought up in a stable, safe, loving environment with the benefit of the role models of a mother and a father.

All this money being spent to redefine marriage would be better spent to find, at least, the cause of this human tendency. Two late borns of our seven sons live with male partners that have occasionaly changed. For more than 40 years, we haven't a clue!

i like hot sauce

There are already Civil Unions which are basically the same concept as marriage, but for same sex couples. Leave the word marriage as a definition for heterosexual unions.

Lets get to the bottom of the real meaning to change this. The gay community wants this to be a "genderless union", not a gay marriage bill. They don't want to be tolerant of the folks that want marriages to be of a husband and wife.

If their gay marriage bill passes as it is stated, current marriage will no longer exist. We will be in "genderless unions" where we cannot be husband and wife. Terms will all change. We, the majority according to the polls, will have to change our ways (and the way of history) of marriage. Gays have the rights of marriage (in a civil union) now and if there are some things that not equal, those can be remedied like the other person said with POA's.

There is a much larger agenda on the side and and it isn't being revealed at this time: getting their foot in the door so that later they can change other laws to make our school curriculum and society genderless.

Is this what we want? I know the polls tell you the answer is NO by a large margin. Let the Vermonters ALL vote.

I find it interesting that the Legislature is bringing it up at this time, so close after the election and so far from the next election. Do you think we will not remember next election that we need to vote you out and put in people who will listen to their constituents?

Bring this vote to the people of Vermont, let them ALL vote, not just the Legislators. I know the vote will be against gay marriage.

Marriage needs to stay one man one women thats the way god created it thats the way it should be, If you don't agree then move cause this is my country and i'm protecting it.

Hey, I'm also a christian, and I'm gay. I'm sorry that God always has to be put in a box by humans so we can attempt to grasp and understand and contain God. Mark Twain's famous saying comes to mind: "Man created God in his own image; God, being a gentleman, returned the favor." There are so many more important issues. God incessantly puts much more emphasis in the bible on how we take care of each other: "Thou shalt love thy God with all thy heart, with all thy mind and with all thy soul. The second commandment is like unto it: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the laws and the prophets." Where does it say there that God cares about who's marrying who? Get a life and practice real God-like love here.

It's time to remember our nation's roots... Jefferson inserted his understanding of our unalienable rights as Americans in his final draft of the Declaration of Indendence: LIFE, LIBERTY, and THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. It was and remains the most revolutionary statement of the meaning of freedom in a democracy. The time has come when that vision must be applied to right to marriage regardless of sexual orientation, as it did it for freedom from slavery, women's right to vote, and the ending of laws prohibiting inter-racial marriage.

Those who have written here (and elsewhere) tend to espouse four arguments: (1) variations on issues relating to the producing and raising of children; (2) same-sex marriage being contrary to the religious beliefs; (3) civil unions being sufficiently adequate; and (4) a preference for a referendum.

The arguments about children are quite beside the point and are far, far more emotional than based in reality. Gay people adopt and some have children already before coming out of the closet. Studies have shown that children do just about the same in same-sex households as in opposite-sex households. And even in opposite-sex households, there often is a choice to not have children, or an inability. The children argument is

The religion-based objections are misplaced. What's at issue is what government will or will not allow, and government cannot advocate religious beliefs.

Civil unions are demonstrably inadequate because they do nothing for Federal-law issues or for situations that occur outside Vermont — and everyone ought to know by now that, as much as we love Vermont, Vermonters like to travel.

And then there's the "put it to a vote" argument.

In a democracy, the notion that the majority should rule is a powerful idea, but we cannot allow basic human rights to be dictated by what a majority of the people say. The majority is not always right.

Ninety-nine percent of the electorate might be offended by the words spoken by the 1%, but the right to speak would still be protected. If the freedom of slaves had been put to a vote in 1800, slavery would not have been outlawed, but it would still have been wrong. If the right of women to vote had been put to a vote in 1850, men would have continued to have the exclusive voting franchise, but it would still have been wrong. If the ability of inter-racial couples to marry and to have children together had been put to a vote in 1950, it would still have been illegal, but it would still have been wrong.

I would like to think that those who oppose same-sex marriage could be persuaded to withdraw their objections, but I am not optimistic about that. The power of long-standing, irrational prejudice is simply too great. Just as the legislature had to ignore the objections in order to enact the civil unions law, the opponents' objections to same-sex marriage must be disregarded as well.

Stop using children as an excuse to hate. Gay marraige has nothing to do with children it has to do with equal rights. If you are so concerned about children having two parents why not put your energy toward being a foster parent or mentor a child left behind by unwed teenagers, drug addicted mothers or irresponsible divorcees...oh wait...their not queer so you don't hate them enough and they're not relevant to your homophobia. Gays and Lesbians do not need to get married to have children together. The truth is that when gays and lesbians choose to have children they are truly wanted because of the lengths they go through to have them which tells a child they are loved. You'll never hear a child of gay parents say they were a mistake. Please tell me what God has to do with equal rights? What is unclear about the "Separation of Church and State" Stop trying to push religious views where they do not belong...and stop with the hate...teaching children to be hateful bigots definately isn't part of religion or God's plan and has no place in a peaceful state like Vermont. Do some good for once and support the children who are crying for help now...not these fictitious ones that you claim to have a right to a mother and a father...open your eyes. As Chevy Chase used to say.."Jane you ignorant slut"

How on Earth would my marriage to my partner of 12 years affect your heterosexual marriage? It wouldn't. I'd still pay my taxes,be a good neighbor, friend and son. I'd smile at you in the grocery store, and continue tip you well in my favorite retaurant. I'll still babysit for you when you need a night off and celebrate life's milestones with you. Denying committed homosexual couples the right to marry based on religious views doesn't hold water. Our heterosexual friends have had the ability, choice and right to obtain civil marriages.....it's time to make this happen,folks. My right to get married will not make you an offense to God,change your religious views or put your children in danger. By the way,how many single parents do you know? How many of those children have little or no contact with one of their parents...If I were a betting man, I'd wager you know more single moms or dads than gay people. Please reconsider your opposition.

If the anti-equal marriage rights folks care as much about children and mothers and fathers as they say they do, why are they ont expending their energies on trying to ban divorce, which clearly hurts children who they say need a mother and father.

Why are they not mustering their energies working against domestic violence where the biological fathers are systematically beating the biological mothers?

Why are they not outraged at the sexual abuse of children within hetero families?

Too complicated? Too challenging to think about? Too close to home?

All of you who are against gay marriage will be looked upon by history as we now view those who fought kicking and screaming against integration.
Give me a reason that's based on anything not biblical, and not preposterous (like molestation charges). My wife and I are a straight couple who are not so narrow-minded to believe we are the only ones who deserve this binding right of love.

All this talk about chilidren needing one mother and one father to be well rounded is nothing but homophobic oppression hiding behind unsubstantiated claims. There isn't a study out there to support their thoughts. It's simply narrow minded conventionality. I have lots of gay friends who have raised children and I'll put them beside a straight family any day.

I asked God and she said it was okay. Just wanted to let you know.

As a heterosexual, married mother and clergywoman (ordained -- United Church of Christ), I fully support the rights of adult couples to marry regardless of whether they are heterosexual or homosexual. Yes, I believe churches and other religious bodies must have the right to perform or not perform same-sex marriages; mine would, others would not, I'm sure. But the STATE must no longer discriminate against any adult couples, regardless of their sexual orientation. Civil unions were a baby-step ... marriage is the real thing and should be open to all.

After last night, this seems to be the only thing on my mind..No matter how many people oppose this issue,WE will still be here.. WE will be in your neighborhoods,schools,and communities. WE will still do what ever it takes to raise a family with love and affection. No matter what people say homosexuals are not going anywhere..so it comes down to this being a battle over a WORD. MARRIAGE. About how people are afraid they will have to change the definition of wife, grandmother,mother, father ect. WHY would that change? Being in a relationship with another female I would love nothing more than to call her my wife.. WHO is saying there can't be 2 wives in a relationship. The definition of wife as stated by mr.webster himself is : a female partner in a marriage. So why would you have to change that?? Thats all we wish to be.. We don't want definitions changed we just want to be able to have everyone understand our love for one another. I had a 3-year old ask me the other day when we were going to "marry". That is what people understand. Young or old they understand the commitment and devotion that is involved in marriage. We should have the same rights as everyone else for people to understand the commitment WE wish to make. Please continue showing all the support!

Marriage is a legal contract (which is why you need a marriage license from the state).

If some churches want to provide an special ceremony for marriages within their religion, that's their right.

However, for those belonging to other churches and those who do not belong to any particular church, we have civil marriage (performed by a Justice of the Peace). Civil marriage should be extended to any two consenting adults who choose to marry, regardless of gender.

Just as the marriage performed by a JP between my husband and I had no effect on the religious ceremonies undertaken by our friends, marriages performed by a JP between adults of the same gender will have no effect whatsoever on the religious marriages of others.

And in the case of those religions that already support same-gender marriage: current law blocks same-gender couples from freedom of religion, because it denies them the right to a wedding ceremony as practiced in their religion.

Passing a marriage equality law will fix two unconstitutional issues created by the current inequality: equal protection under the law, and freedom of religion.

As far as the person claiming that every child has a human right to one mother and one father, that is the same attitude that caused the government to rip thousands of children away from their widowed parent, only to be stuffed into orphanages during the Great Depression. I'm sure we do not want to go there again... Children raised by two loving, committed adults, *no matter the gender*, are shown to fare better than children raised in an unhappy household. I certainly hope you are not planning to legislate happiness within households....

well said L.Allen! How many single mothers and fathers are there out there who are taking care of their children alone.. ?? I want to be able to raise a family and be respected as a family.

I find a lot of the comments in this thread frightening and ignorant. Let's move Vermont ahead!

Doesn't it seem funny that all the people that are against gay marriage are the ones who go to church every Sunday,live by god,are born again christians,people who swear they never do wrong,yea right, all they do is sit around and worry about everybody else. Worry about yourselves, and stop butting into everyones business. Love is love, and thats it, does matter who you love, are these church people saying that if it was their child they would never speak to them again? Come on now, let it be,and leave the gay alone. I'm 75, was married for over 40 years, have children, and since my husband died, i found a women who i love, leave us alone, and vote for gay marriage.

In response to the one father one mother deal I'm proud to say that my brother and I are the results of wonderful parents, a mother and a father, who are guess what BOTH GAY!! Living with them has taught me the meaning of unconditional love and support and I could imagine no better childhood than what I've had with my two mothers and father. PARENTING SHOULD NOT BE DEFINED AS BEING AN ACT BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN, but as how well you care for your children and I would be honored to be the kind of role models they were for me. Sexuality does not define who a person is, it's just another characteristic. I only wish they had received the same rights as any other couple in the world when they decided to make their union legal.

The Gay Marriage bill should NOT be passed. Whether someone believes in God or not, they can see that ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN is the only way to naturally have a child together. It just makes sense. Gay marriage is unnatural, and, if everyone was gay we would eventually become extinct (without the use of unnatural implantations and such).

If a gay couple wants to live together and/or have a civil union together, then that's up to them, but redefining marriage does affect me. I've heard a bunch of people say to "be tolerant" to gay people, but I've never heard anyone "being tolerant" of people like me, who stand behind the TRUE definition of marriage: ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN FOR LIFE. They aren't being tolerant of us, because they are trying to redefine what marriage is. The push here is to make marriage a genderless love commitment. This should not happen! Please vote NO to this. If this bill is passed, all laws in Vermont will be altered to make them genderless. Our heterosexual marriages will be considered genderless by the law! Do we really want to become a genderless society?? NO!!
Why are those who are for the bill so opposed to taking the vote to the people? As far as the comparisons to slavery, and that a vote by the people wouldn't have outlawed slavery, that is an irrelevant argument: For one thing, the majority of people more than likely would have voted to end slavery (the North was opposed to it, just most people weren't sure how to actively end it without war). Also, why is this issue even being compared to slavery?? No one is trying to make gay people their slaves! No one is trying to make them do anything. They are trying to make us redefine what marriage is, what it always has been, and what it always will be.

Why can't we just fix the civil union contract so that it gives gays all the rights it does a man and a woman that are married. By, why do I have to lose my religious contract of being married to a man vs woman? Why cant we all be equal without taking away from the other group.

Why does this have to be done with no VOTE???? Let Vermonters show their preference by bringing it to ballot. Then, it will be done legally and not shoved down our throats.

This issue has created a great divide amonst many Vermonters. I, as a citizen of this state, feel that two people who love each other should ave the same rights as any other couple. As far as the religious aspect is concerned, I have no ill feelings toward staunch believers in in God. Not all people have the same beliefs in this respect. Were it so, there would not be as many denominations as there are races. I believe in the credo, "Live and let live." There are a great many monogomous gay couples in the world that just want to be accepted as a "normal" couple. The ability to raise a child has nothing to do with sex. Case in point would be the 1 man 1 woman couples who abuse, mistreat and even in the end kill the child. Does this make them any better parents to a child than two men or two women? Feminine role models teach our children patience, morals, love, caring and (believe it or not) even faith. The same can be said about their masculine counterparts.

It's not an issue of, "they have it and I want it," it's an issue of equality. We are in essence denying the gay community the basic rights that we afford to a straight couple because we don't understand their psychological make up. Love is love, no matter who the parties involved are. If we are to truly be enlightened people, we need to move forward on this issue and treat everyone the same. This is a difficult time for many of us and drawing lines in the sand doesn't help. We have put undo pressure on our senators by making the issue cross denominational.

How ironic it is that anti-gay people shuttle between the argument that gays are promiscuous and having meaningless, one-night-stand lifestyles, and then erect every barrier possible for gays to have lifelong, committed loving relationships.

If straight marriage has problems, it's not gay marriage. No straight is going to become gay as a result of gay marriage, and no gay is going to become straight because of its prohibition. If anything, allowing gay marriage signals society's message that lifelong, committed relationships are favored as a matter of policy. As far as children go, there's an oversupply of unwanted, un-cared for children of straight marriages that are sitting in foster homes.

If we are going to redefine marriage, why stop at two parties being involved? Should a threesome not have the same rights to marry as a couple? How about a foursome? If marriage is no longer going to be defined by sex, then why should it be defined by number? In fact, why stop their. Should marriage be restricted to only human beings? Why not open it to all sentient beings? Who says marriage needs to be between only two people? One would think that those that wish to open the door to same sex marriages would be not so fast to shut that door as soon as they got what they wanted. Seriously, why limit marriage to two people when there are those that wish to live as polygamists? Should we allow a sister and brother to marry? How about two sisters? Two brothers? Should they not be afforded the same rights as non-blood relatives? I am sure those that support same sex marriages will be quick to dismiss these questions as being out of hand because they do not fit their very specific agenda. I ask again, if we are going to redefine marriage because it limits the rights of some, why not completely open it up so it does not limit the rights of any? Either be willing to completely open marriage, or keep it what it is.

what is wrong with you people !!!! man and woman,and that's the way it should be.
but then again maybe i'll leave my husband of 32 years,move in with my best friend, who has a really great job with benefits,claim to be lesbian,get married and collect from her insurance benefits!!!! besides who can prove were NOT having sex.
i think it's wrong,just wrong!!!so many people are going to be able to take advantage of the system it pathetic !!!!!!!!
(if their not already)
"GOD MADE ADAM AND EVE,NOT ADAM AND STEVE"

I agree with Sofie. And I think much of the arguement is about semantics since civil unions cover rights. The current description of marriage is ageless and should remain intact. Perhaps we should come up with another term as a substitute as what happened with the word "Gay".

And I do not agree with the discrimination arguement. The following statement should not cast homosexuals as evil.

We all discriminate in our society. There is a line of social behavior. Where is becomes relatively unacceptable is based on the current convetional wisdom. On one end is the righteous married heterosexual couple (both virgins) who never committed a "crime" including speeding.

On the other end are the scourge of society; the obvious being pedophiles, serial killers, beastiality proponets.

And in between is everyone else. It is where the line is drawn on what is acceptable is where the discrimination starts in our society in the form of laws and policies. We all discriminate on certain behaviors is the point.

Federal Tax Laws defined marriage for filing returns as a man & a woman and that is not going to change regardless of Vermont law..
I have lived in Vermont 72 years and raised 6 children and I am not ready
to welcome all the gay individuals in the world to come here and live. I would prefer that my grandchildren grew up in a normal society and I agree
with our governor. My personal philosophy is live & let live, but isn't anything
sacret anymore.

I will not use the words Marriage and Gay together! I will not equate my marriage with my wife with this Gay Union that some of our so called 'representatives' are trying to shove down our throats!! This should be voted on by ALL vermonters and not dictated by a very loud minority!! The Governor is to be congratulated for having the backbone to stick by his principals ! Our 'representatives' should concentrate on all the real problems in the state! Jobs ,health,and budget problems galore!!

I think people should have the right to be with who they want when they want and not have to be scared to walk down the street and be judged because they are different. People who are judging these people dont know why they are the way they are because its not them.

This is just insane. I cannot believe that this is even an issue. Just because there are people out there that enjoy being with the same sex. Doesn't mean we all have to except it. I'd like to remind them were did they think they came from a test tube.???? It was an act of God. And Why do the politicians think that they can re write the book of the Lord. That is exactly what they are doing. Kids in school today are afraid to take showers after gym. They don't know who they are showing with and if they get a glance is it because the other kid is interested. I mean come on. You people are putting straight kids in a difficult situation. Not to mention what it feels like being in a public place and seeing them carry on. I am so sick and tired of all this horse radish. Look to the way God intended us to be. Adam and EVe. Not Adam and St--e.
I am sorry but this is all wrong so wrong. They have civil rights that is all they need. In my opinion It is way too much at that.

Whether you believe God exists or not...HE DOES. Whether you believe He's the God of Abraham Isaac & Jacob or not...HE IS. Whether you believe you will stand before Him one day to give an account...YOU WILL. Whether you believe the bible is the inspired word of God or not...IT IS. Whether you believe that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son so that you would not perish but have ever lasting life...HE DID. Whether or not you believe Jesus is the ONLY Savior this world has...HE IS. Whether or not you believe we are born in sin...WE ARE. Whether or not you believe you are a sinner who needs a savior...YOU DO. Whether or not you believe Jesus died for you....HE DID. Whether or not you believe God loves you unconditionally....HE DOES. Whether or not you believe that that all things pertaining to life & godliness are found in Jesus...THEY ARE. That is why He is called the stumbling block, my friend. The question you need to ask yourself is the same question Jesus asked Peter....WHO DO YOU SAY THAT I AM? When Peter answered "You are the Christ" Jesus told him that flesh & blood had not revealed that to him, but his Father in heaven. No man, no woman, no church, no religion, can open your eyes to the truth. It is only your Father in heaven who can do that. Until that happens, mankind will continue to do what seems right in his own eyes. If you listen carefully, you will hear him whisper....WHO DO YOU SAY THAT I AM, MY FRIEND?

Gay marriage=ABNORMAL SEX.

I noticed that the votes for "No" increased by like 600 over night, do I spell vote bot with proxies? I believe I do.

It is my understanding that religion should have no place in controlling the lives of individuals who wish to have no part in such belief systems. Same sex marriage should be allowed regardless of personal bias, belief or superstition. Traditionally in the constitution marriage was allowed to all, the constitution was changed by religious radicals who wanted to monopolize marriage for themselves.

Children should have the right to two parents who LOVE them regardless of what sex the parents are. I think it is absolutely ridiculous that it is being said that a child has the right to one mother and one father. What about single parents? What about dead beat moms and dads? I think that in this day in age if a kid can get any two parents that love them to death they're lucky.

God created us to feel and express "natural affection" for people of the same sex. If you have have a close friend or family member, you know what natural affection is. It is only when we exchange "natural affection" for "unnatural affection" that it is wrong. Whether it is between two people of the same sex or between family members. Most Lesbian or Gay relationships begin as friendships. It is only when they buy the lie & step over the line into a sexual relationship that it becomes immoral. Moral Relativity has obscured the lines of right and wrong in our nation. We are still reaping the consequences of the sexual revolution of the 60's. But, trust me, that will "pale" in comparison to the what we are about to experience as a nation.

We are living in the day spoke of in the bible when evil will be called good and good will be called evil. May God have mercy on us and may God forgive those who fought for gay marriage in Vermont...they know not what they have done.

Don't believe what you hear in the news. The truth is...Vermont DID NOT say YES to gay marriage! A liberal legislation with a lot of money from outside interests voted this in. The people of Vermont were denied an addendum because it was well known that had a vote been given to the good people of Vermont, it would not have passed! This is just one more example of government without representation.