>>>Old-school Mormons or Moslems or other religions who want to sanction some form of polygamy or polyandry should be free to do so with the understanding that the marriage has no civil legal standing.
>>>
>>Perhaps once gay marriage gets legal standing, these marriages will too????
>
>That's one of the arguments against gay marriage. People (errr...ok some bible-tumper-type people) seem to think that if you legalize gay marriage then next it will be 3 people marrying each other, or 5 people marrying each other, then people marrying a duck or a dog or a rabbit. They jump up and down screaming "oh my gaaawd where will it end??".
>
>What the whole thing boils down to is that these folks have decided that they don't like the idea of 2 gay people getting married because...errr...well..uhhh.. just because they simply don't like the idea of it - and therefor have decided to regulate morals with laws. The problem of course is that defeats the whole concept of "American". You can't simply exclude a group of people just because you don't approve of them - with no other real reason other than that. It pretty much is the definition of discrimination. That was one of the humorous arguments one of the lawyers was making - he was trying to say ...oh well congress didn't invoke this act because of moral standards or reasons...but if you go back and read the summation of the act - that's EXACTLY why they did it & furthermore they explained that this IS the reason they did it. Of course one of the supremes caught that and read the summation to the idiot lawyer - who responded "oooh it says that??". I have to say listening to the arguments I don't see how the supremes are going to allow the defense of marriage act stand - it's like every time the lawyers try to argue why it should stay put, they get ripped by the a couple of the supremes because their argument is either simply not-factual (as above) or simply crazy stupid.
>I recall hearing a republican senator try to say a couple of days ago that gays shouldn't be married because they can't have kids. That's another good one there - like only people that can have kids get married (or should get married). And then she went on to explain that this is just a trick by low-lifes who want a free ride or something for nothing from the government - so she says what will happen is that guys will just marry other guys so they can get a free ride of some sort. Yes that makes sense too because we all know that a straight-man will do anything to get his fellow guy peers to think he's gay when he's not.
>This is all living proof that the bible-thumpers - ultra conservatives - and most republicans are vastly out of touch with the real world these days. Its a shame as these all used to be good folks.

What amazes me is that most who are against Gay marriage use religion as the justification. Giving everyone of adult age the right to marry whomever they choose does not take away any rights of mine nor does it restrict their right to worship and practice their religion in anyway. No one is forcing anyone into anything. Each religion has the right to choose whether not not they will perform the ceremonies or even recognize it. I thought this country was founded on religious freedom and the prevention of anyone forcing their own religion on anyone else? They have the the right to believe what they wish and to follow the guidelines of their religion as long as it doesn't break any laws. They do not have the right to force their religion on anyone else. I do not believe in "no religion" either - that is not religious freedom either but the restriction of religions. I do believe in religious freedom and human rights to all humans on this planet.