>SNIP
>>
>>Haha, so you think our form of government invokes the tyranny of the masses? I've heard congress described in many different terms but . . . .
>>
>John,
>
>In respect of the "initiatives" prohibiting gay "marriage" I'd have to say yes, it does in many areas.
>

Marriage is an institution. It is a formal relationship between a man and a woman, not a man and a man or a man and a sheep, etc. Two men living together can be called a "civil union", but not a marriage.

>In respect to the prevalent current that judges there (your Supreme Court) are making the laws that are the mandate of the Congress - specifically a vocal majority wanting to put that straight - I'd say yes again.
>
>In a "free" country there is to be no tyranny of anyone by anyone. Each is to be free to do their own thing within the laws, where the laws have nothing to do with "morality".
>

I think your picture of "free" country is really utopia. Sorry, that place is right next to Funkytown, it doesn't exist.

>Since I'm not a gay variety, a law prohibiting gay marriage has no impact on me either way. But I surely do see it as unjust (there's that LIBERAL coming out in me). Just because the Bible suggests that gays will go to hell, does it mean that it's right to make their lives here hell too???
>
>cheers
>
>SNIP

I don't think the Bible I read "suggests" gays will go to hell. I think it is pretty clear about people who reject Jesus going there though. I think there'll be plenty of heterosexuals in hell too. I'm just not planning on being able to give an "on site" report.<g>