Yeah, I don't like the word "sanctity" popping up in Presidential addresses. For one thing, it implies something is sanctioned by God and therefore sacred in nature, and that's not cool for the government to take into consideration. Second, how can we pretend marriage is so "sanctified" when half of them end in divorce, and Britney and all the TV networks can use it as a publicity gimmick?

I could not agree with your article more. Separation of church and state MUST be at the basis of all modern democracies. Unless this happens, you will always create an underclass of "infidels" amongst your own citizens.

Church and religion must be something that each person choose to attend and practice privately.

The US constitution the foundation and inspiration of many democracies seems to be more easily put aside these days. Shame.

You need to do some more research. Who said anywhere that there was a "seperation of church and state" clause? That's not in the constitution. Also, I don't hate fags and I'm not a judgemental asshole. What's wrong is wrong. If I think murder is wrong no one gets pissed, why is it that when I think having sex with someone of the same sex is wrong everyone is all offended.

Everyone needs to stop being so judgemental and upset about the whole ordeal. Let people believe what they want to and don't get all bent out of shape and pissed off if someone doesn't believe the same way you do.

I did plenty of research. Congress shall not pass any law respecting an establishment of religion, pal. That means basing any kind of legislation banning same-sex marriages on any religious doctrine is unconstitutional.

You can not like same-sex marriages all you want. But if you want us to respect your right to dislike them, you must respect our right to endorse them. Not agreeing with something is not a reason to prohibit it. If you don't like homosexuality, don't be gay. End of story.

I'd have to agree with Mike on this one. And it's not just because I know for a fact he could own me in a heartbeat If I try to get in an argument with him.

Majic, you say, "...why is it that when I think having sex with someone of the same sex is wrong everyone is all offended."

Didn't Mike already say this on that issue?

"if the thought of marrying someone who is the same sex as you is nauseating or disturbing, you don't have to do it. But there are plenty of people out there who are more than comfortable with the idea."

It's like he read your mind! Or maybe he just knew someone would take it to heart and get offended, when all he was doing is pointing out Gays deserve the same rights as Straight people. He never said, "Kill all the homo haters!" So please, read the editorial first, and don't take it to heart so quickly.

I would like to hit on the seperation of church and state issue. Everyone says that "Congress shall make no law respecting a religion" means exactly seperation of church in state. Why would our founding fathers mean this if they themselves would break it? One of the first acts of Congress was to pass out Bibles to the indians, thats breaking it. Wouldn't you think if they meant seperation of church and state they wouldn't have done that? This does not mean seperation of church and state, but it the watered down liberal interperation of it.