California overturns gay marriage ban.

[Sasquatch]

sorry but I'm not going to take your flamebait pal.

...except for that short, irrelevant post, anyway.

Heterosexual marriage isn't a 'right' either. It's part of socialised society. So why not let gay people do it?

Because, as you said, heterosexual marriage is a part of "socialised society".

I don't agree with it, and neither do you, but marriage to minors and your relatives is legal and 'normal' in some societies; but not ours.

I'm sorry, but whether or not it's socially accepted never has and never will decide the difference in whether something is "right" or "wrong". It's not "right" to eat human flesh because some Indian religious sects do it, it's not "right" to molest little boys because NAMBLA supports it, it's not "right" spread AIDS with the belief that raping virgins cures it because some villages in Africa do it, and it's not "right" to marry somebody of the same sex. It may be "normal" in some societies -- or, in this case, moreso, somewhat socially acceptable -- but that doesn't make it "right" at all. Unless you wait to said that murdering unborn children, spousal abuse, and slavery are (or were) all "right" at some point in time because they were socially acceptable.

For that, we are thankful, because we think it's disgusting. We'd like to see it wiped out, but that is not our 'right'.

It's "our right" to try to "wipe out" marriages to relatives, children, animals, or multiple partners, but not between two men? Who decides these "rights", and how are they brought upon?

There's also the question of legality when talking about marriage to children and animals. Our legal systems are set up so that those incapable of truly making a decision, namely children and animals, are not allowed to do so. They cannot be subjugated into it because our society sees them as being incapable to say either yes or no and really mean it.

And why has our "society" decided that children and animals can't make decisions like that for themselves? Why can't we go back to the decision that people of specific races are somehow "less", or that women are incapable of making competent voting decisions?

The same logic doesn't apply to gay people, who are adult human beings fully capable of choosing what they want to do.

So are relatives and multiple spouses, but there are still laws against marrying them.

Baiting a member you know to be gay doesn't help your case much.

The specific member has, on multiple occasions, taken personal offense -- or at least responded like they had taken personal offense -- to general, non-insulting comments. I made a comment regarding his typical response to anything he can possibly interpret as slightly offensive.

This isn't a question of financial benefits ...

Actually, that's exactly one of the points being made. Tax breaks, which will raise taxes for everybody else.

Most if not all of Heterosexual Marriages pretty much end with a sheet of white paper stating a divorce, and pretty much all of heterosexual couples getting married waste money too so whats the difference?

Did you really just say "if not all" when referring to marriages ending in divorce? Wow. Anyway. What statistics do you have that homosexual marriages are so much better than heterosexual marriages, taking into affect the time that heterosexual marriages last and that most homosexual marriages haven't been legal for long enough to be compared accurately?

The church is making the people live in a hynotic world where its heterosexuals all the time, and that homosexuals are the acid of the earth and deserve to go to hell. The Church are the real criminals, the real slime of the earth. Homosexuals have done nothing more then live their lives, and they would like to live their lives in peace without being afriad to let their voices be heard by bible-humpers and thick headed homophobes who wish to oppress them. Marriage between a Man and a Woman ain't so "sacred" as you think it to be.

Wow. And it's all those Bible-thumping hillbillies that are prejudiced and brainwashed, ain't it.

Spreading hate, and oppressing homosexuals for living there damn lives in peace.

Of course, because all heterosexuals "oppress" homosexuals. Riiiiiight.

and you wonder why many homosexual kids are getting teased, tortured, and beaten to death.

Define "many". Kids get teased for anything and everything -- if it wasn't for one thing, it'd be for another, or another, or another. If a kid can't take a little teasing, hell, they might as well off themselves while their bodies won't take up much room. What, you think everybody else here didn't get teased as a kid?

This is about Human dignity, not money, or finacial numbers.

The acceptance -- or, moreso, promotion -- of homosexual marriage has nothing to do with "human dignity", whereas the existence of homosexual marriage had quite a bit to do with the lack thereof.

So unless some huge percentage of America is gay and decides to get married, the rises in tax will be negligible.

So? Whether I'm paying five dollars extra per year or five thousand dollars extra per year, the point remains that it does have an affect.

It's like when people say they don't want universal healthcare because it'll raise taxes.

Socialized medicine is an entirely different can of worms, but for the record -- most people don't say they don't want it because it'll "raise taxes", but because it will charge uniformly for a low-quality service. Not because it will "slightly" (pshaw) raise taxes, but because it will do much more damage than it would help anything. But if you want to compare the two subjects, they are both alike in the aspect that they cost taxpayers money without providing anything decent back.

... if you want to be justified when you band around the world teaching the brown people how to behave ...

And out comes the prejudice again. Maybe if the last few thousand upon thousand of American lives hadn't been in defense of those "brown people", you could start talking about overstepping our bounds. Or maybe if millions upon millions of those same "brown people" weren't ready to give their lives for the same causes as those followed by American soldiers.