The Washington Post has released more data from its recent poll of 1,180 adults in Virginia. The results are hardly surprising: 47% are in favor of gay marriage and 55% are in favor of gay couples being able to adopt.
As Waldo Jaquith points out, it is the younger people who are making the difference.
Most young folks think that gay marriage should be legal. Most old folks think it should be illegal. As those old folks become dead folks, and more young folks come along, there’s every reason to think that these numbers will keep right on rising.
Wonder if we can get some more of those young folk in the legislature?
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
“Most young folks think that gay marriage should be legal.”
Another example of our government schools being unable to teach our children the language and the meaning of simple words.
I’m an old folk I guess (65) and I believe every adult should have the right to marry anyone they please and adoption should be open to anyone who is willing to love and support a child.
Thanks, Peggy, for getting it.
I would have no problem with every adult’s having the right to marry any other adult — so long as the government does not force anyone else to accept it as equivalent to traditional marriage. Homosexuals should be allowed to marry, but Catholic Charities should also have the right to not place a child with them, and employers should have the right to not provide health insurance for same-sex spouses.
I also believe polygamy should be legal. I can see no reason that, if same-sex marriage were legal, polygamy should not also be legal.
Gay people in this country work and pay taxes. If born here or become citizens they should not be discriminated against because they choose to love someone of the same sex. Their union should have the same legal standing as heterosexuals. There should not be a question. As to polygamy, I do not believe that being allowed access to multiple vaginas because a voice in your head told you you should has a legal or moral equivalancy. Only in your dreams Mr. Warren, only in your dreams. BTW, When you adopt a child through a religious agency lawyers are still involved. When you marry in a church you still have to have a marriage license from the state.
“As to polygamy, I do not believe that being allowed access to multiple vaginas because a voice in your head told you you should has a legal or moral equivalancy.”
Let me get this strait, you think that homosexual marriage, which is condemned by the Bible, is more moral than polygamy, which is not only sanctioned in the Bible, but is REQUIRED if one’s brother dies without children?
“When you adopt a child through a religious agency lawyers are still involved.”
A propos of WHAT?
“When you marry in a church you still have to have a marriage license from the state.”
Which is wrong. Marriage is a RELIGIOUS issue. Government prohibitions on certain marriages are violations of the First Amendment. Similarly, forcing others to recognize those marriages is also a violation of the First Amendment.
So what you are saying, is that LGBT couple would be second class citizens in your suggestion.
A special category, not recognized as “real” marriage, but something people can pretend is real.
Oh, and no equal rights of health insurance. Those who are not religious will be forced to abide by a religious construct of marriage.
No thanks.
Not at all. The government would not be able to force any recognition of marriage on anyone. If a company wants to give health insurance to their employees same-sex spouse, that’s fine. If the company does not, that’s fine too. If another company wants to give health insurance to their employees three spouses, that’s fine. If the company does not, that’s fine, too.
It is the company’s money, and no-one has a “right” to any of it. If you don’t like how the company spends it’s money, go work for another company, or buy from another company.
Marriage is not a Religious issue. Like I said you still have to have a state issued license for it to be legitimate. When the marriage fails, it will be settled by the lawyers and the courts. Just because the Bible says it is okay to practice polygamy doesn’t make it right. There are lots of things in Leviticus or Timothy that show these guys should be on medication. Mr. Warren, I’m just sayin…. your beliefs have no more weight than mine. Just because you reference the Bible does not give you more credence than my belief that two people who are committed to one another have the right to a union that deserves the respect and guarantees of Civil law.Religious perspective is a choice that should not be legislated upon another. You can’t have it both ways. If you are religious and decide to have multiple wives in Virginia let me know how that works for you. I’m very sure the legislature and not the Bible will decide.
Marriage has existed with and without government. That government has taken control of it only means that the government has overstepped its authority.
It seems that YOU are the one who wants it both ways. You want the Legislature, not the Bible, to decide whether one can have multiple wives, but you do NOT want the legislature to decide that two men cannot marry.
I think I must have misread your comment, so I will ask directly: Do you, or do you not, want the government to decide who can and cannot get marries?
If the answer is “Yes,” then you cannot say that the gay marriage ban is infringing on anyone’s rights, because a “YES” answer says the right to make that decision lies with the legislature.
If the answer is “No,” then the legislature has no more right to ban polygamy than it does to ban homosexual marriages, and it should get out of the marriage licensing business altogether.
I’m looking forward to the day when we just “shrug” over this nonsense. I know we have made progress but it’s sad that so many have rights denied.
I hope to see equality in my lifetime.
According to Warren, we should let the corporate overlords decide whether someone deserves health insurance,and the church to decide who can get married.
Nah, I don’t see any problems there.
Sounds just like status quo to me, with polygamy of course, which Warren seems to have a particular fondness for.
We should let people decide for themselves where to spend their money, or the money others have entrusted to them. If you don’t like that, form your own company or invest your money in companies that conform to your values.
And marriage has always been a religious institution. Marriage existed before governments. If you don’t like your church’s views on gay marriage, work to change them as the Episcopalians did, or form your own church.
As for polygamy, it is of particular interest in the United States because the US government required that Utah outlaw the practice before it would be admitted into the Union. Furthermore, while homosexual acts are sinful, according to the Bible, polygamy is not, and is even required in the case of one’s brother’s dying without children — the living brother was required to marry his dead brother’s wife and to raise children in his brother’s name.
So, if the State cannot deny one the “right” to marry someone of the same sex, how can it have the power to deny the right of a woman to marry a man she loves, just because he already has a wife?
Wow, Thanks for letting me know its the women who instigate polygamy. In the state of Utah where this practice is most common, most of the polygamous wives ask the state for welfare. Seems the state or taxpayers are required to step up and support the children of this biblical arrangement. The men called by the voice in their head still need a welfare state to make it work. As to your earlier posting I do not want anything both ways. I believe that same sex couples should not be denied the same guarantees the rest of Americans have. They are equal citizens. If you decide to engage in polygamy I hope the ladies have reached the age of consent and have careers that can support your fantasy.