I think that gay marriage should be between a man and a woman.
I think same sex couples should be able to get married.
I've just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.
Every major world religion has identified marriage as between a man and a woman.
I support ensuring that committed gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country. I believe strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away and passing laws that extend equal rights to gay couples. I've required all agencies in the federal government to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LGBT families as the current law allows. And I've called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act.
If there is a substantial difference between a gay couple and a childless heterosexual couple, I'm unable to see it.
And I want you to notice that one of them, one of the men almost has his tongue hanging out like he's licking his chops. Like this baby is ours now. And that's fine. You may call that love. But it looks to me a little bit like lust. And when they crave to bring the children of heterosexual couples through adoption into their homes, so that they can raise them in the homosexual lifestyle. And studies now show, that up to 20% kids raised by gay couples become gay themselves. It is a recruiting tool. And it is a child abuse tool.
I think everyone should be with who they love. I don't want to be controversial or stir up a bunch of trouble but people are going to love who they are going to love. I think gay couples should be allowed to marry. They should suffer just like us heterosexuals. Ha ha ha!
You could move.' ---"Dear Abby" responds to a reader who complained that a gay couple was moving in across the street and wanted to know what he could do to improve the quality of the neighborhood.
I saw with so many of the gay couples, they were so devoted to another. I saw so much love. When this hearing was over, I was a changed person in regard to this issue. I felt that I understood what same-sex couples were looking for.
One of the loveliest weddings I ever performed was that of a gay couple. To me if you are a good citizen, you pay your taxes, you work, you should have all the rights and responsibilities of everybody else.
If the court strikes down the Defense of Marriage Act, is that a 'liberal' result enabling gay couples married in states where gay marriage is legal to enjoy the same economic advantages that federal laws now grant to straight couples? Or is it a 'conservative' ruling, limiting the federal government's ability to override state power?
I think that there's no doubt that as I see friends, families, children of gay couples who are thriving, you know, that has an impact on how I think about these issues.
Well let's face it, who on earth besides antique dealers and gay couples actually still give dinner parties?
We [me and Jennifer Salke] talked about the characters and different kinds of families and where are we today. We certainly pitched the gay couple, but we also talked about what it was like to be a single mother with a young daughter, what is it like to be a woman in your 50's who is completely starting over and dating again and having to go online to date again. We talked about the whole spectrum of the characters, but I don't think it ever came up about whether people are ready for it or not.
I think gay couples should be allowed to marry. They should suffer just like us heterosexuals.
What is so powerful here is that we have the first federal appellate court and it's a case coming out of Utah affirming in the strongest, clearest, boldest terms that the Constitution guarantees the freedom to marry and equal protection for all Americans and all means all, including gay couples.
The reality is that most gay couples don't want to adopt a child. Those who do, though, are often prepared to devote themselves entirely to their adoptive child.
Legislators in Kansas, Arizona and 23 other states who are properly determined to protect religious freedom can begin by asking themselves: Does any religious conviction justify denying lesbians and gays a basic legal promise of non-discrimination in hiring, public accommodations, and housing? Surely the answer to this question is no. Correcting that inequity would begin the process of recognizing that both sides - gay couples and religious objectors - have rights and that reasonable accommodation is possible only when both sides have something to gain.
I'm personally supportive of marriage equality for gay couples and I believe that it will happen over time.
or simply: