Updated 12:47 pm.EST, Sun November 22, 2009

Society|Mon, Jun. 02 2008 04:08 PM EDT

Calif. May See Gay 'Marriage' Boom, Study Says

By Alexander J. Sheffrin|Christian Post Reporter

The recent ruling by the California Supreme Court to legalize gay “marriage” could provide a $370 million boost to the economy over the next three years, according to a recent study.

M.V. Lee Badgett, research director at the Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy at the UCLA School of Law, said that a sudden rush by the state’s nearly 100,000 same-sex couples to tie the knot, combined with a desire to heavily splurge on state recognized “marriage” ceremonies for the first time, would be a boom for hotels, resorts, and wedding retailers.

"There's an opportunity to get a big wedding windfall," she told the Los Angeles Times.

The potential of a so-called gay "marriage" boom gained wide recognition and entered the public discourse after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger joked about it at an Environmental Defense Fund event in San Francisco two weeks ago.

"You know, I'm wishing everyone good luck with their marriages and I hope that California's economy is booming because everyone is going to come here and get married," Schwarzenegger said to a crowd of laughter.

The Family Research Council, however, has countered the assertion that a gay “marriage” boom would be good for California, adding that it is a very serious matter.

“All joking aside, the Governor has put his finger on a big issue. Homosexual couples from across the nation will flock to sunny California this summer, obtain marriage ‘licenses,’ and return home to use them to batter every other state and its voters into submission. The real ‘booming’ you will hear is the destruction of our nation's laws protecting the institution of marriage,” the conservative group said in a statement.

Pro-family groups hope a referendum that would ban gay “marriage” will be successfully placed on this year’s ballot for voters to decide on during this year’s election in November.

If a majority of state residents vote positively on the ban, the amendment will overturn and nullify the state’s high court ruling on gay “marriage.”

The measure – which is still being processed by the State Registrar – has attracted over 1 million signatures.

While recent polls gauge support for the California measure as mixed, a national Gallup poll revealed gay “marriage” to be unpopular among the vast majority of Americans.

Only 40 percent of Americans “currently say marriage between same-sex couples should be legal,” according to the poll’s results released last month.

Since 2004, when the Massachusetts State Supreme Court made its ruling to recognize gay “marriage,” 27 states have passed a constitutional ban on the practice, while over a dozen others have passed laws limiting or outlawing it.

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
  • Mon Jun 09, 2008 1:56 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I may be in the minority here, but I think there is a parallel between the 1949 song from South Pacific and today's "homophobia" (for lack of a better word. The Broadway play received scrutiny for its commentary regarding relationships between different races and ethnic groups. In particular, "You’ve Got to Be Carefully Taught" was subject to widespread criticism, judged by some to be too controversial or downright inappropriate for the musical stage. Sung by the character Lieutenant Cable, the song is preceded by a lyric saying racism is "not born in you! It happens after you’re born..." Rodgers and Hammerstein risked the entire South Pacific venture in light of legislative challenges to its decency or supposed Communist agenda. While on a tour of the Southern United States, lawmakers in Georgia introduced a bill outlawing entertainment containing "an underlying philosophy inspired by Moscow." One legislator said that "a song justifying interracial marriage was implicitly a threat to the American way of life." Rodgers and Hammerstein defended their work strongly. James Michener, upon whose stories South Pacific was based, recalled, "The authors replied stubbornly that this number represented why they had wanted to do this play, and that even if it meant the failure of the production, it was going to stay in." (Much of this borrowed from wikipedia....)

  • Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:10 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Does it matter what my neighbor is up to in the privacy of his or her bedroom? Yes. The will bring a howl of protest in our individualistic culture, but none of us live on an island. The cost to society last time from we redefined marriage in the 60's and 70's ended up at 112 billion a year. These are the costs dealing with the break up of families and the stress they place on every thing from schools to law enforcement. If you expect society to subsidize the fall out from redefining marriage, then society does have the right to say what goes on in your bedroom.

  • Fri Jun 06, 2008 11:55 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    The statistics will show and do show that "marriage" in the gay community is a minority issue. There will be the initial boom in Calif. and then it will dramatically fall off. There is also the question of if marriage will mean the same as it does for the heterosexual community with thousands of years of traditions and customs, both religious and secular, shaping it's understanding of marriage.

    So what is preventing you and your partner from exchanging vows right now?

    While marriage has undergone cultural changes, it has always been limited to male and female. That has been a constant in all cultures through out history. A hundred years from now we will wonder why the gay culture attempted to co-opt the cultural traditions of another group instead of developing their own. What ever happened to our much vaunted belief in multi culturalism where we celebrate diversity? The gay community is free to create their own traditions. There is nothing legally preventing them from doing it. The legal benefits stemming from heterosexual marriages were given by society as a recognition of the benefit of marriage to the cultural at large. This happened over thousands of years. The gay community is certainly free to follow a similar path.

    ( Sidebar: I have not included religious views in my arguments not because I do not believe them, but because I believe when arguing in a secular world you have to use secular arguments.)

  • Thu Jun 05, 2008 2:44 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Another point, GreatNW: These people that we don't want married are not interested in your opinion or mine. They are as free to live their lives as any other Americans are. As far as abortion is concerned, I hope I never have to deal with it in my family. Barbara Bush told her husband NEVER to mention abortion from any political platform. It was none of his business. Where are those old time Republicans? (Actually, I think they are reemerging.) The only person with any say-so about that abortion is the woman carrying the baby (God help her!).

  • Thu Jun 05, 2008 2:39 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp12132003.html

    GreatNW makes some good points. I still recommend the above Web site -- for some history of "marriage," which has been defined over the years by each culture as it wanted to see it. I have no idea what points made bythe Tufts professor are accurate. But picture this: City Hall, marriage license department, two lines; one is traditional marriages, the 2nd line is what? "All others?" In a secular government, is there something intrinsically unequal aboutthese tow lines?

  • Thu Jun 05, 2008 12:33 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    GreatNW, I hear your points, but here's the thing: You can't generalize what you gay brother thinks about gay marriage as being representative of the entire gay community. My experience has been quite different: most of my gay friends would want to marry, and I have no doubt they will be in a monogamous relationship. Traditions are changed all the time, but we're also not at all talking about changing religion, where much of the tradition lies. I am talking about the legal right to have marriage protection. As a law abiding, tax paying citizen, why can't I? My marriage will not hurt anyone else, and I am in love with my boyfriend. If you ask straight couples in MA, I'm quite sure they'd say nothing about their marriage or its importance has been changed or hurt. Also, if you're so concerned about the state of marriage, why aren't you going after those with the high divorce rates (the heterosexuals you claim are doing such a good job.)

  • Thu Jun 05, 2008 9:53 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    They used to say the same thing about abortion "rights". That people would eventually all come around to the supposed enlightened view. However, if anything, the pro abortion view has lost ground since Roe v Wade. The gay lobby has employed a similar strategy to redefine the issue as a civil rights issue and has attempted to claim it is an identical issue as to race. Then any opposition to it can be seen as bigotry and they can shout down any opposition as a hate crime. This only works if you buy in to the underlying premise that they are equivalent issues. They are not. Marriage is open to people of all races without restrictions. There is nothing keeping gays from forming relationships and developing their own traditions, customs and ceremonies. Just as heterosexuals have done over the centuries. There is a big difference between marriage and legal rights such as death benefits, employment, housing, etc. Most of the legal rights are or have been hammered out and it does not require redefining marriage.The gay lobby likes to keep the to wedded together for political reasons. They are separate issues. So what is actually going on then?

    For awhile, "blessing ceremonies" were all the rage in the gay community but they never gained any traction so they moved on to co-opting the tradition of marriage through the courts thinking that this was the problem. The problem is you cannot co-opt traditions. They just don't work that way. It is not like getting a license to drive a car. Traditions are created from the meaning associated with them over years of practice and use. My brother, who is gay, readily admits that the whole marriage issue is a non issue in the gay community. Most have no desire to "marry". It will not be something that will be widely practised. Very different from the heterosexual community. Many feel it is a sell out and an attempt to try conform to heterosexual norms. Much like in the 1800's when we would dress Native Americans up in "white" clothing to make them appear more acceptable. They already openly talk about what "marriage" means in the context of gay views on fidelity and monogamy. At what point do you redefine an institution so much that it loses all meaning? The only net effect of redefining marriage will to see it's further decline. And while marriage has changed through out the centuries, it is clear that when you erode the institution of marriage society will suffer as a whole.

  • Thu Jun 05, 2008 6:56 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    In a parallel case, my gr-gr-grandparents owned 1,000 slaves. These people were not even allowed to marry until after emancipation. The brother of my forbear wrote long polemics defending slavery -- even quoting Christian scripture to prove that the institution was part of God's order. I think that 100 years from now, my great-grandchildren and yours will look back on us the way we now look at those mid-19th century Americans. I don't think our descendants will "blame" us so much as they will forgive us for being narrow about the mind of God. I hope so, anyway.

  • Thu Jun 05, 2008 12:29 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I have an aversion to being directed to outside links. Just a pet peeve of mine. Please summarize or make the point in your own words.

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:40 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    blocked?

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:33 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    .

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:22 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I agree with you and "honesty" that marriage has some very real practicale benefits. It's the way I have chosen to live with my wife of almost 40 years. But I also know that thsi institution has been "tinkered with" since the beginning of time. The Christian scriptures are fairly recent, compared with humankind's time on earth. I have asked the "Post" journalist to read Gary Leupp's letter to Romney (http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp12132003.html). I don't know how much of the information is accurate, but there is history worth considering in his remarks.

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 10:56 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Our experience of the last 30 years has proven just the opposite from what was touted in the 70's when we sought to redefine marriage. Instead of ushering a new ear of freedom and liberation from archaic social structures, the redefining of marriage has blown through our culture like an OT plague. The poor are especially hard hit. As Honesty pointed out in her post - regardless of your religious views - marriage has some very real practical benefits to individuals and to society through out history. We need to stop tinkering with it and instead think of ways to build it up. And we do have a right to say what another person does when we are the ones who end have to subsidize the enormous financial impact of their behavior on society. Like King David in the OT, our actions do have consequences beyond ourselves. It is not a message that an overly individualistic society likes to hear.

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:50 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Most of us are so ignorant of our "history." I often fall into that group. I suggest the following Open Letter to Gov. Romney -- for a history lesson: http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp12132003.html

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:04 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ,

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:59 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    .

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:58 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ,

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Am I blocked?

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:29 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

    SqueakyWheel hit the nail on the head!

    Post-Modernism isn't about building a healthy functional society, looking out for your fellow man and leaving a lasting positive legacy. It's about "grab all the gusto you can get" and "eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die".
    When people cease considering the repercussions of their actions on others - society is in a downward spiral that can only end in annihilation. It's ironic that we have a humanist to thank for the quote: "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it".

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:17 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Every society throughout history has adhered to a general standard of morality. Not all societies have been Christian, but the Creator has instilled in most the common sense of what produces life and benefit. Just because recent heterosexual society has failed to work the plan does not invalidate the Creator's original design. And throughout time, when a society allows itself to take the downward slippery slope into immorality, eventually that society ceases to exist. My husband is a history teacher and has extensively researched this.

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:44 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Marriiage (as most of us grew up with it) is part of a social/economic contact that our culture used for centuries to keep the top-rail people firmly on top. No matter what the Bible or some other religious book decrees about marriage, those religious texts have little bearing in a secular nation. The 60s revolution found just how lacking the institution of marriage really was, and marriage sufferd. But it was the heterosexuals, mostly, who destroyed the sanctity of marriage. One hundred years ago, my people (white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants) were "in charge" of their whole world. My family STAYED married. Men did men's jobs;women did women's jobs. We liked it that way. But It wasn't all that good for poor people, non-white people or non-heterosexuals (for instance). Nowadays, I sometimes am uncomfortable around certain "liberated" folks. But, you know, many of them really don't care, because what they do is actually none of my business. Even if I think they are up to something that is immoral (in my book), my rights do not extend to how those people can and will live their lives. I guess I'll get over it. My grown, church-going children seem to have "gotten over it." Amen to that!

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:33 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Am I blocked?

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 10:55 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Just for the record, I in no way HOPE these calamities will come, as a result of the rulings. Please don't misread me. I PRAY these things will NOT happen, but more than that, I PRAY that men and women will turn back to God, morality and decency.

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:25 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    It is not like we have don't experience with what happens when you tinker with redefining marriage and the impact on society. In the 60 and 70's we decided that we needed to loosen the definition of marriage as a life time commitment and ushered in the now infamous divorce culture. The cost of that experiment is now conservatively pegged at 112 billion a year. From welfare, education, law enforcement, health care the cost of the divorce culture has negatively impacted all aspects of society. Now, we want to tinker again with the definition of marriage and we are hearing the same old argument that such a change will be a positive for society.

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:31 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Flagged myself, just tried to respond mostly in the affirmative to SqueakyWheel's post, but the system won't let me post. Something is blocking it.

  • Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:38 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 1

    A "$370 million boost to the economy" is a superficial short-term assessment purely from a tourism viewpoint. What the left-leaning authors of the study do not evaluate include the long-term negative consequences of same-sex marriage to societal norms on the emotional, moral, spiritual, health care, medical, financial costs to be accumulated for the big picture.

    How can a study ever concretely measure the long-term emotional effects on children of not having a father and a mother in the household? How does one measure the emotional consequences to a child's self-esteem, dysfunctional role modeling concepts, self-worth and formation of sexual identity? What is the generational impact of children who grow up in such households? What are the medical costs involved when AIDS & STDs are spread through unhealthy sexual contacts?

    What are the spiritual costs to society when unhealthy sexual practices and relationships are codified and legalized, thereby giving legal license to relationships that are immoral? How can one quantify the impact of large groups of people hardening their consciences to what they know in their hearts are wrong?

    Just evaluate the reactions to this post & you can tell just how many people have closed their hearts to the quiet whispers of their consciences. One is not living in the joy of authentic freedom when one is addicted to sexual lusts and self-centeredness. True freedom is living as a bond-servant of Christ, our Lord and Savior.

    What paradoxical thinking to our post-modern culture!

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 7:31 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    A "$370 million boost to the economy" is a superficial short-term assessment purely from a tourism viewpoint. What the left-leaning authors of the study do not evaluate include the long-term negative consequences of same-sex marriage to societal norms on the emotional, moral, spiritual, health care, medical, financial costs to be accumulated for the big picture.

    How can a study ever concretely measure the long-term emotional effects on children of not having a father and a mother in the household? How does one measure the emotional consequences to a child's self-esteem, dysfunctional role modeling concepts, self-worth and formation of sexual identity? What is the generational impact of children who grow up in such households? What are the medical costs involved when AIDS & STDs are spread through unhealthy sexual contacts?

    What are the spiritual costs to society when unhealthy sexual practices and relationships are codified and legalized, thereby giving legal license to relationships that are immoral? How can one quantify the impact of large groups of people hardening their consciences to what they know in their hearts are wrong?

    Just evaluate the reactions to this post & you can tell just how many people have closed their hearts to the quiet whispers of their consciences. One is not living in the joy of authentic freedom when one is addicted to sexual lusts and self-centeredness. True freedom is living as a bond-servant of Christ, our Lord and Savior.

    What paradoxical thinking to our post-modern culture!

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 6:56 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ShuckCreations,

    You defended honesty, “there is no "hope" in honesty's statement. He's merely giving an I told-you-so prediction.”

    It’s obvious from his comment that he “hopes” his “I told-you-so prediction” comes true.

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:26 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    In my previous post, I entered scripture from the bible and it got flagged as inappropriate. Since when is scripture inappropriate? I saw other posts that were scripture related also got flagged as inappropriate. Everyone keeps talking about the love of God. They'll take his love, but not his words. It's like me telling you that I want everything you have to give me, unless of course it is something I don't want, then I'll throw it back at you.

    God does love everyone that is why he sent his word. To help us to make it to the kingdom. But it is up to us to receive or reject. Evidently it got rejected. As well as this post probably will also.

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 1:13 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    No, it won't. The ballot initiative has qualified for the ballot, so the people will have the final word in the November elections at the ballot box. This will put an end to the gay marriage fiasco pushed by the militant homosexual lobby who found four judges to overthrow the will of the people. Flag this and I'll just repost it. I can wait you out.

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:54 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    No, it won't. The ballot initiative for a constitutional amendment has qualified for the ballot, and the people of California will put an end to the homosexual marriage issue in November at the ballot box.

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:27 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    didymus, there is no "hope" in honesty's statement. He's merely giving an I told-you-so prediction. I love how people will twist and put words into others' mouths.

    (flagged myself for corrections)

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:49 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    God bless you all,

    This is a trumpet call to battle!!! For too long we have just stood by and have done nothing and it's time that we join the fight for our country! High gas prices, the mortgage crisis, fall of the US dollar, recession, political corruption, increase of immorality and natural disasters are all a wake up call so that we can open our eyes and get active! We are not a minority, 90% of Americans believe in God and only 2% are atheist and part of the "gay community". But obviously the minority has united and mobilized in the cause to distort this countries perception of it's Judeo-Christian foundation.

    If you enjoy the high gas prices, millions of people losing their homes, cyclones, brush fires, earthquakes, terrorism, incurable diseases, famine, recession, murder, crime and all types of evil. Then just continue to do nothing, but if you want to soften the blow on God's judgments on this land then read my latest blog post. After reading it please forward this as an e-mail to as many people as possible so they can join the fight to save America.

    http://answers2why.blog.com/

    No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.

    Romans 8:37

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:41 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    A poster below said, “When the earthquakes and volcanoes hit California, remember the recent ruling in favor of homosexual marriage”

    It really is sad to see “hope” such as this, to hope for the wrath of God to come as mass death on thousands of innocent people. Remember, Jesus died for homosexuals to, he did not come to exterminate them, and everyone who lives in the same state with them.

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 9:49 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I'm amazed at people that approve of homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle. Leviticus 18:22 says "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

    And before you start saying, it's OT, remember that the OT is what Jesus taught out of, because at the time there was no NT.

    Even Paul had a lot to say about it. Read what he had to say about it in 1 Cor. 6:9-10 (Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God) or Romans 1:27-28 (And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;).

    This is not my opinion its in the bible.

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:38 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 4

    Does Gov. A. Schwarzenegger have a calculator? Let see the income and the outcome will be for t California's economy;

    Deu 29:22 And the next generation, your children who rise up after you, and the foreigner who comes from a far land, will say, when they see the afflictions of that land and the sicknesses with which the LORD has made it sick--
    Deu 29:23 the whole land burned out with brimstone and salt, nothing sown and nothing growing, where no plant can sprout, an overthrow like that of SODOM and GOMORRAH Admah, and Zeboiim, which the LORD overthrew in his anger and wrath--
    Deu 29:24 all the nations will say, 'Why has the LORD done thus to this land? What caused the heat of this great anger?'
    Deu 29:25 Then people will say, 'It is because they abandoned the covenant of the LORD, the God of their fathers, ...

    You can see clearly that the Gov is a movie actor not an economist!

  • Tue Jun 03, 2008 12:00 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    A "$370 million boost to the economy" is a superficial short-term assessment purely from a tourism viewpoint. What the left-leaning authors of the study do not evaluate include the long-term negative consequences of same-sex marriage to societal norms on the emotional, moral, spiritual, health care, medical, financial costs to be accumulated for the big picture.

    How can a study ever concretely measure the long-term emotional effects on children of not having a father and a mother in the household? How does one measure the emotional consequences to a child's self-esteem, dysfunctional role modeling concepts, self-worth and formation of sexual identity? What is the generational impact of children who grow up in such households? What are the medical costs involved when AIDS & STDs are spread through unhealthy sexual contacts?

    What are the spiritual costs to society when unhealthy sexual practices and relationships are codified and legalized, thereby giving legal license to relationships that are immoral? How can one quantify the impact of large groups of people hardening their consciences to what they know in their hearts are wrong?

    Just evaluate the reactions to this post & you can tell just how many people have closed their hearts to the quiet whispers of their consciences. One is not living in the joy of authentic freedom when one is addicted to sexual lusts and self-centeredness. True freedom is living as a bond-servant of Christ, our Lord and Savior.

    What paradoxical thinking to our post-modern culture!

  • Mon Jun 02, 2008 11:53 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 4

    Several years ago I though same-sex marriage would be a mistake. Now I see that it really is a "conservative" initiative. It is better for all of us if these people are living in committed relationships. Besides this, what you or I (in the majority) think cannot -- in a secular nation -- limit the civil rights of any minority. The California judges were not activist. They were mostly Republicans who saw the constitutional law as it really is. Gay marriage is coming, even if the majority of Californians vote against it. It's only a matter of time. I'll be glad when all the discussion is behind us! Maybe then the Post articles will not use those tacky quotation marks around "marriage" when the word follows the word "gay." That seems so smug of the Post.

  • GMG »
    Mon Jun 02, 2008 11:11 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    I doubt very seriously that honesty has the ability to cause earthquakes and volcanoes at will.

  • Mon Jun 02, 2008 10:49 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    honesty claims to be a christian but is advocating mass murder.

  • Mon Jun 02, 2008 6:54 pm Agree: 7   Disagree: 14

    When the earthquakes and volcanoes hit California, remember the recent ruling in favor of homosexual marriage, and others laws including what is mandatory for little innocent children in primary grades to be force fed homosexual garbage so they can learn all about 'alternate lifestyles.' Pardon me while I puke.

  • Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:15 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 5

    I can see the game show, "The Newlywed Game" being a big hit once again (only now with same-sex couples). It would be a real money-maker.
    Is Bob Eubanks still alive?
    Bob?
    Bob?

  • lina »
    Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:11 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 9

    Agreed!

  • Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:25 pm Agree: 18   Disagree: 15

    I am so glad the CA Supreme Court finally sided against bigotry. Congrats to all of the newly weds!!!

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • Music
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links