matthew skurdahl http://www.jta.org/user/profile/63663 en-us zsilberman@washingtonjewishweek.com Copyright 2012 2012-02-09T;22:54:00-05:00 Lots of problems with the first couple of comments posted here (especially PCS) #1. Putting religious dogma into the CA constitution is a clear violation of the separation of church / state. #2. Stating that most people are repulsed by homosexuality is an opinion only, and perjorative. #3. No evidence that there is a genetic predisposition to alcoholism. Also, the analogy is irrelevant. Turnaround: should we also amend the CA constution to prohibit alcoholics from marrying? -- this would probably be more beneficial for society than a ban on gay marriage - less domestic abuse, child abuse, etc. #4. No one is asking for your "affirmation, support," or anything else other than that you refrain from imposing your viewpoints upon us. If you don't want to marry someone of the same sex, then don't. #5. Reall tough to understand how PCS thinks that it is showing "love" by denying someone fundamental rights an treating them as second class citizens. #6. If "Marriage" were the issue here than this proposed amendment would include a ban on divorce. #7. I'm "repulsed" by a lot of heterosexual behavior -- conceiving kids before the parents are ready (or the quickie marriage to cover up conception before marriage), divorce, spousal abuse, etc. This doesn't give me the right to tell them they shouldn't marry. #8. "God created me" gay. I was raised by a Lutheran minister and taught nothing but the straight lifestyle. After over a decade of struggling I finally accepted that God made me just the way that I am, and that the very best I could do with my life was to share this with someone else that "God made" the same way. What's so hard to understand about this? How ironic that the Mormon church -- the sponsors of polygamy -- would dare to tell Californians how they should define marriage. That the irony of this is lost on the "Yes on 8" people is simply amazing. 2012-02-09T;22:54:00-05:00