Why is everyone still whining about Republican spending? Have you noticed how much money Obama has spent in the last month? Money that we don't have? It's more than Bush spent in his last 2 years in office.

Seriously. Let it die peacefully. It makes you seem ignorant. It's divisive, cold, arrogant, bigoted, illogical and irrational.

"We have Constitutions and unelected judges and things as a check on the power of the majority to bully other people any old way they want."

That's not true and you know it. We have these things to insure "The People" have the last say over a Government they may not agree with. If you think "We, the People" refers to special rights for any given minority of the populace, you're mistaken.

Also, the other strawman arguments given here are irrelevant. Never forget that, if for some stupid reason, the people CAN re-alter the Constitution to allow for slavery. This country IS set up for rule by the people. The People can always modify the Constitution "at will" with a majority. It is our right.

We can be thankful that we're a nation of mostly thinkers who want a Government that does good for all people. However, sometimes you have to draw a line between those who want special rights and those who think one rule is good for all.

I'm against homosexual marriage for one reason only: Homosexual marriage is a special right and has nothing to do with "equal rights." If you want to add polygamy, adult incestuous relationships and a few others that do not interfere with the rights of other Americans I'll be all for it. Until then I'll be against these special rights given to a few people. "Equal Rights for ALL" means exactly what it says.

"Er...no. That's a very common misunderstanding these days. The country is set up for rule by representatives, who derive their ultimate moral authority from "We the People" (as opposed to God, in contrast to the Divine Right of Kings). Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (not CA's) require being passed by two thirds votes by the Senate and the House, and then ratified by three quarters of the states. This is not "at will." It's exceedingly difficult, and rightly so."

If the legislature doesn't vote the way you, the majority of The People, want them to vote, you remove them from office and elect those who will. Something of this sort just happened. The People have the power in this country and, hard/time-consuming or not, we need to always remember that.

If there are laws passed that the majority decide they do not like, it may take 3 years but those laws will be revoked.

Elected officials tend to not go against the will of the majority. They know they find themselves ex-Senators or ex-Congressmen. Look at the members of the California Government who are raising the most stink about Proposition 8. Is it elected officials? No.

You said: "And how can you call it 'special rights,' when 90% of the people are already allowed to do it. No one's asking for gay folks to be able to kill or steal, or to drive at 110, or cut in front of us at lines. It's for the same rights that we have. That's like denying black folks the right to vote, because it would be a 'special right' for them. Sorry, no. I don't buy it. I believe strongly that equal treatment under the law is a moral imperative."

Special rights mean exactly what I said they mean. You can't walk down the street with a rainbow flag with "EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL!!!" printed on it when what you really mean is "MARRIAGE FOR GAYS AND NOT POLYGAMISTS, ETC.!!!"

I'm sure you're aware that when homosexuality was illegal it didn't stop people from practicing it and I'm sure you're aware that incest being illegal now doesn't stop people from practicing that. There are thousands of people in this country who practice polygamy without being married to more than one spouse at a time because it is illegal for the same moral and religious reasons homosexual marriage isn't allowed.

When equal rights for all means exactly what it says I'll jump on the bandwagon. At the present time homosexual marriage is a special right not being afforded to all people equally.

If you're not ready to have Mr. & Mrs. & Mrs. living next door to you then I'm not ready to have Mrs. & Mrs.

Homosexual marriage sets a big legal precedent for these examples plus, probably, a few more. I prefer to have all our eggs in one basket. Homosexual marriage IS a special right afforded to a few of the people who deserve it as much as some of the others who CAN'T marry for the same reasons. Homosexuals not being allowed to marry will not affect them anymore than not allowing polygamists or adults in incestuous relationships to marry. The ONLY difference in them is that homosexuality is, now, more open.

I have absolutely no moral problem with homosexuals marrying. Hell, spread the misery. However, I draw the line at what I see as a special right not afforded equally. Say we had allowed black Americans to vote and not Asian Americans. THAT would have been a special right. Allowing homosexuals to marry and not allowing others is also a special right.