American Civil Liberties Union

A strong argument put forth in favor of letting stand the ban on gay marriage is that overturning the ban would seem to open the possibility for legalizing polygamy. After all, polygamy is permitted and indeed practiced by one of the world's largest religions (Islam), and presumably many of its adherents seeking to immigrate to the US; it has support in the Old Testament, and was even practiced in the Utah Territory, before its statehood. (Some sects continue to practice polygamy as well.) Even if we eschew religious precedents, there seems to be no principled legal distinction between gay marriage and consensual polygamy, indeed some of the arguments (biological procreation) mildly favor polygamy over gay marriage.

Does the ACLU have an official stand on polygamy? If it supports polygamy, is it making its support known to the general public? If, however, the ACLU opposes polygamy, on what legal basis does the it draw the distinction between gay marriage and polygamy?

I think it would be wise to point out to the courts the vast amount of lies and misinformation that the Prop 8 supporters put out in their advertisements. Like how they tried telling voters Obama supported their stance when he did not, his view was a personal one that he made clear he would not want to be made as a law. Also the lies that stated regarding schools and churches being forced to do things when they would never have been forced to do anything at all.

I find it disturbing that the ACLU is not condemning the many violent protests that have resulted from the passage of Prop 8. Regardless of how one feels about gay marriage, it is evident that these protests have gotten completely out of hand. Destroying the property of others, death threats, etc., are not right, and in fact, violate the civil liberties of innocent people, who are merely exercising their right to free speech.

I propose that the term be changed to "same-gender beloveds" because I know a devoted male couple who are celibate (actually, "chaste") & who are offended by being identified as "homosexual". I am a celibate (chaste is the actual word) female, because of my spiritual experience.

I haven't yet come upon anyone recognizing that "Twin-Flames" (the original one-and-onlys who emerged as one from The Source and then divided into a pair) can be same-gender (or far apart in age or blood-relatives, etc.). Well, technically, I mean "Twin-Flames" as described by Elizabeth Clare Prophet. According to some, one can have many "soul-mates" but has only one "Twin-Flame".) Would we ever think of denying anyone their one-and-only? This is not the only argument for protecting civil rights, but it is a very important one. Think of what it did to Romeo and Juliet.

www.unitingtwinflames.com
"...in every Twin Flame relationship one half is carrying the Divine Feminine and one half the Divine Masculine. These people may both be in female bodies, or both in male bodies. This is frequently observable in a same sex relationship."

Excuse me -- I didn't read carefully what I quoted. The male couple I know are both as masculine as any other men. I'll merely quote:
"These people may both be in female bodies, or both in male bodies. This is frequently observable in a same sex relationship.”"

Here we have people (racist, sexist homosexuals) who often refer to the heterosexual as "those Breeders". It saddens me to say they have lost my support by showing how extremely racist and anti striaght they are. Invading churchs screaming about the violation of their rights while stating that they don't care who's they violate ot get what they desire. Over 100 years ago the TERM marriage was defined as a union between 1 man and 1 woman. No were in the bill of rights or the amendments does it state that anyone of any sex has a right to marry. Marriage is NOT a constitutional right. Homosexuals have screamed that the church violated "seperation of church and state". NO were in the bill of rights or the amendments does it state that the church and state shall be seperate. It provides for the church, any church of any denomination to be free of interference from the state.
That being said I support the right of any couple even those of 3 or more consenting adults to enter into a legal and binding "Civil Union" which provides all the protection of marriage to those families. I also feel that those Gay couple that married before prop 8 should be allowed to remain legally married as it was allowed legally before the defining of the word marriage by prop 8. As a young man we were all taught in school what was legal at the time we committied it could not be used against us once it was made illegal. That is the LAW of our land. This protection was provided to the Mormans when Pologamy was banned.
This is not a fight I feel the ACLU should be involved in, THIS IS NOT A FIGHT ABOUT THE SUPRESSION OF A RACE. It is a fight about the use of a WORD. In recent weeks I have seen the homosexual community acting no better than the very NAZI community that once forced them to wear a pink triangle and marched them of to labor camps and death.
Sadly this has cost them the support of many of us in the heterosexual community. Remember we were born this way and it will not rub off on you.

What is the definition of a word in comparison to allowing people to marry those they love? After all, we had to "change the definition of marriage" to allow the marriage of mixed-race couples. Since there is no evidence that children raised with two parents of the same sex turn out any worse than children raised in a "normal" family, I don't see that giving homosexuals the ability to marry actually harms anything.