Should gay marriage be banned?

President Bush has announced his backing for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

His decision comes after San Francisco's mayor decided to start granting marriage licenses to gay and lesbian people.

The Massachusetts Supreme Court has also recently ruled that banning gay marriages is unconstitutional.

By proposing a constitutional amendment, President Bush has ensured that the issue will play a major part in the forthcoming Presidential elections.

The President stressed that he respected individuals' rights and that states were free to provide legal arrangements for gay people other than marriage.

Do you agree with the President's decision? Was this necessary to end confusion over gay marriage in the US? Will the issue define the Presidential elections?

---

This debate is now closed. Read your comments below.

The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:

You can't have everything in this life Paulette Mason

I think choosing to have a certain lifestyle will include some sacrifices, this includes not having children and getting married. It's a lifestyle choice, you can't have everything in this life.
Paulette Mason

We are a homosexual male couple, together for 19 years. With "gay marriage" comes gay divorce and few homosexuals have thought of that, the costs involved, loss of property, legal claims on estates. There is no such thing as "gay marriage" in the biblical sense and nor could there ever be. Not for us and onto our 20th year as happy bachelors gay!
Johnny & Jay, East Sussex, UK

I am gay, and believe that the blessed institution of marriage - with its shameful 50% plus divorce rate, ridiculous drive through chapels and curiously popular joke "reality" television shows should be reserved for one man and one woman. What we need is to be creative in defining a new institution that defines OUR commitments to each other while providing all of the same rights, protections and freedoms afforded to those in "traditional" marriages. Keep marriage - I'd like something better for myself.
Tom, Brooklyn, NY, USA

If two people whether gay or straight wish to announce their intentions of commitment to one another in front of witnesses, I encourage it. Perhaps the world will be a better place for it, love not war. The issue in the USA is merely a fear of change from tradition and money. The only intermediate acceptable solution is to lawfully recognise the "union" and afford gay couples the same financial privileges that heterosexual married couples have.
Tristan James, ex Pat, Miami, FL, USA

It is time to extend equal rights to all individuals Cristina Acevedo, Spokane, WA, USA

The institution of marriage is fluid and has reflected changing societal norms throughout history. Just this past century, it has changed to legally recognise inter-racial unions and allow women equal status. It is time to extend equal rights to all individuals.
Cristina Acevedo, Spokane, WA, USA

Gay marriages should not be banned. If two people love each other and want to marry, who is it going to hurt? The only marriage that is any concern, is my marriage to my wife (an English Rose).
Big Bob, Phoenix, Arizona

Gay marriage should not be banned. Divorce is the greatest threat to the definition of marriage. Will the Religious right try to ban divorce next?
Alice Lisle, Ajijic, Jalisco, MX

If you have no religious belief then a marriage is simply a union of two people who love each other. If you have a religious belief then anything other than views that are held by your religion are bound to offend. In my opinion religious attitudes spoil so many things in life for so many people. I'm gay and have no desire to marry, my partner and I don't need to tell the world we share a bed.
Nick Smith, Orihuela, Spain

Aren't there more profound issues to be dealt with? If someone wants to be ceremoniously united with another person of the same sex, why should there be so much fuss about it? They are living together anyway aren't they?
AMK, India / USA

Many people on this page have a misconception; The Bible is NOT part of the American legal system. "God's Laws" are merely guidelines for believers and have no legal relevance whatsoever. They defer to "Human Law" every time and without redress. Idealists within the church may not bully the state without consequences. Be sure the state will defend itself vigorously and the church will lose.
Lawyer, UK expat

To all same sex couples who wish to "marry", I say, do so anyway. Have a ceremony in front of your friends and loved ones, arrange a contract between you with witnesses. All states, all hypocrites and all homophobes can just rattle their cages and shut up.
Chris Newman, Lowestoft, UK

It is an individual decision whom that person wants to marry, who are we to stop them from doing that.
John, Seema, NM, US

Who cares if you're gay or straight? Julie, Madison

I think this is Bush's way of making sure there's an issue that some might agree with him on in the election. I think he'll try to make this the front issue to take the spotlight off his horrible record in absolutely every other area. Who cares if you're gay or straight? Two people making a commitment to one another is just that. And a constitutional amendment is just ridiculous and arrogant.
Julie, Madison, WI

As a gay Christian male, I find those who oppose gay marriage on religious grounds to be hypocritical. On the one hand, sex outside of marriage is supposed to be a sin. On the other, they don't want gay couples to marry. The two positions are clearly contradictory even to the most naive observer.
Joseph Robert Shafir, Toronto, Canada

I feel the issue of gay marriages is really an issue of minority rights Jennifer Kessinger, SF Bay Area, United States

I feel the issue of gay marriages is really an issue of minority rights. It was not long ago that interracial marriages were illegal and that segregation was the law and supported by the majority of Americans. As a minority in an interracial marriage, this issue strikes close to home. Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, is a rare politician who has stood up for what is right under the state's Constitution, not for what is politically popular or for what can advance his political career. He has renewed my faith in the political process.
Jennifer Kessinger, SF Bay Area, United States

I believe that gay marriage should be banned; as the bible say's "righteousness lifts up a nation, but sin is a disgrace". The issue will define the presidential elections because God can raise one leader or bring down another. God is Holy and desires to lead mankind into a Holy lifestyle that brings true happiness.
David Ranger, Hastings Canada

When people stop hating and fearing then perhaps real love will be possible, and my hope will be rekindled. Every day I pray for my faith in humankind to stop waning, but it doesn't. I can only hope that we will see the error of our ways before it is too late.
Jessica, Raleigh, USA

How amazing that so many people all over the world get all worked up over what Bush does Brian O'Neill, Winnipeg

How amazing that so many people all over the world get all worked up over what Bush does. Brits complain (is there gay marriage in UK? No!) Germans (see above) Chinese (again...) French (mais non!). Mind your own business.
Brian O'Neill, Winnipeg

How does issuing a Fatwa against gay marriages make America any safer or give people jobs? Gay marriage, straight marriage, I don't care.
Kobina Aidoo, Miami, FL

"Gay" marriage is quite simply not marriage and can never be. Ask a plumber how to join to male irons together. The matter is ridiculous! And it is certainly not a matter of religion!
Stuart, UK

I think banning gay marriages is a totally right choice Matthias "Matt" McFarland, Sacramento, United States

I think banning gay marriages is a totally right choice. We are at risk of ruining forever this sacred thing by allowing people to tamper with eternal laws.
Matthias "Matt" McFarland, Sacramento, United States

A lot of people say that gay people should be able to have civil unions but not marriage. That is still discrimination, denying gay people the full rights as everyone else. If you asked any heterosexual couple if they couldn't get "married" but can only get a civil union, don't you think they would be upset and feel discriminated against?
Tony, Wisconsin

As we move forward, our perceptions and the way we live change. The family unit as we know a few decades ago doesn't exist any more. Same sex marriage is just a natural progression.
Krishna, San Jose, CA

All Bush did was force the states to make a decision on the issue of gay marriage that is binding in each state. George W. knows full well a constitutional amendment will never pass on the issue of marriage, so why would he risk taking another round of heat again from all of the "experts" when he knows what he wants will not ever come to fruition?
James R. Heathman, Fresno, California USA

Why does marriage have such a "sacred" meaning? Kevin M, Buzzards Bay, MA , USA

Why does marriage have such a "sacred" meaning? It is essentially a civil contract. I can think of no rational or coherent reason why individuals residing within this country should not have the same rights to such a contract. The concept of "tradition" does not hold water; slavery was tradition in this country for well over 150 years, and it was abolished as abhorrent.
Kevin M, Buzzards Bay, MA , USA

Having read this page, I am so encouraged about the human race! When two people love each other anyone can feel it in the air! Please don't condone ANYTHING preventing sanctity between loving parties! Coming from a broken home, i don't think I would have ever questioned where stability came from. "God" bless those who find love." God" bless civil liberties, and a "non" judgemental culture!
May, LA, USA

What are you so afraid of Mr. Bush? Is filling the world with more love and stability for are children the wrong thing to do?
Yvonne W, Grindrod, Canada

Bush's decision to ban marriage for same-sex couples is undoubtedly discriminatory Andrew, Cardiff, UK

Bush's decision to ban marriage for same-sex couples is undoubtedly discriminatory and in a country where religion is supposed to be separate from government surely such a decision is not only prejudicial in the extreme but runs contrary to the Constitution. As to the term itself, it's all very well for people to say that "civil union" or some similar wording should be used for the formal joining of a gay couple but at the end of the day I wouldn't want to be "unionised" with my partner; I would want to be "married" and I hope and trust that that's what will eventually come to pass in both the US and, eventually, in the UK too.
Andrew, Cardiff, UK

Why is it that arguments against gay marriage almost inevitably evoke "God"? Precisely because there is no other reason for a ban outside of the attempts of some religionists to impose their own beliefs on all of society. Given that the US Constitution grants freedom of religious belief to all, it does not take a giant intellect to understand that a ban on gay marriage is ultimately a violation of the religious freedom--which includes the right NOT to believe--of those who do not share these extreme and intolerant ideologies.
Dr P J Smith, New York

Same sex marriages should be just as legal as heterosexual marriages. The United States of America was established by and for the people who did not want their justifiable rights taken from them or be in want of them. This issue shows just how bigoted our "Leader" is. Shame on you Mr. President. Whatever happened to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness? It is slowly being taken away from us.
Patty, Santa Cruz, CA USA

Marriage is a sacred vow to the one you love, no matter same sex or different. The government needs to spend time and money on more important issues.
Kimberly Maxwell, Wilmington, United States

Lets forget about the ethical issues for a moment - this is simply a quick way to attempt to increase Bush's popularity and should not be allowed to work as a smokescreen.
Simon, UK

George Bush is trying to turn the US into a theocracy Edward, London

George Bush is trying to turn the US into a theocracy. It's absurd that gay couples should not be afforded the same legal rights as same sex couples. Yes, there is a tendency for gay couples to treat relationships less seriously, on the gay scene per se, but when two people decide on marriage, whether gay or straight, they are demonstrating commitment to each other, and are making a very personal feeling, public. George Bush needs an education he won't find in his precious bible!
Edward, London

I have absolutely no problem with Gay people wishing to marry. It shows they care and love each other as much as a 'straight' couple would. This attempt to ban Gay marriages is appalling. I really don't care if religion tells us this is wrong, it is about personal feelings and not what some far right religious groups have to say. I'm sure there are many other practices, for example, hunting, that religious types would not object to, but others would. This is unfortunately yet another sign that President Bush really needs a swift education in the real world.
Mark Warren, Canada

As a practicing Christian, I fail to see why this is an issue. My particular religion does not support gay marriage or gay unions. However, I do not see why the fact that someone else becomes a part of this union should bother me in the least. By that logic, if the main argument against gay marriage is that God does not wish it, well then, perhaps we should also bring back the Inquisition, and while we're at it, convert everyone to a single religion as chosen by George W. Bush. Just as one cannot tell people what to believe, one cannot tell people who to love. Frankly, it is their business and they should be allowed to live their lives as they see fit.
Ksenia, NJ, USA

I am gay but do not support gay marriage Mark Aldridge, London

I am gay but do not support gay marriage - I do not think it is necessary. I do however think that George Bush is a threat to the way gay men and Women are perceived and it scares me to see him taking this extreme action - I basically hate any discrimination of any kind.
Mark Aldridge, London

Yes gay marriages should be banned. On an evolutionary scale it is wrong. Those performing "Weddings" should be arrested as well. There are ways to protect your partner. Power of Attorney, list them as the beneficiary on insurance and retirement documents. Purchase homes in both names. Both names on checking account, savings account, everything possible. Have a Living Will. I have seen partners where one has legally changed his/her name to match the others.
Yvette MacQueen , Orlando US

As a Black Man, who has to address lifelong issues of discrimination, I find it quite upsetting that the Bush Administration would consider promoting and enacting a constitutional amendment that would enforce further discrimination against its people. The term "marriage" should refer to a loving and unifying relationship between adults. Yet this government would see it become a term used to polarize a nation, and enforce prejudice and discrimination against its own brothers and sisters. I can't help but think that that if the Bush Administration, and those who support his decision, had a sense of irony they would realize they are threatening the very institution they propose to defend.
Ali, Pennsylvania, USA

If gay people like to stay together, that's fine but they cannot use the word marriage Marian, Toronto

YES, marriage is only between man and woman. If gay people like to stay together, that's fine but they cannot use the word marriage! Anything else but that. The problem is not what they are doing. It is about what marriage represents (union between man and woman). Thank You
Marian, Toronto

Pure ignorance is shown on the part of those opposed to gay marriage. I am yet to hear a compelling argument as to how gay marriage will cause the downfall of America as we know it today. God's views as to how "he wants us to live" are not held by all those living in the United Sates. Last I checked, hundreds of different races and religions all called America home. But I suppose I will be proven wrong when, after gay marriage is made legal, volcanoes erupt, earthquakes rumble, and tornadoes sweep across the county, ending life as we know it.
Eoin, Boston, MA, USA

With 70% of all marriages ending in divorce and a large percentage of couples actively deciding to never get married, it seems that the institution of marriage is on death's door, all on its own. One would imagine that George W Bush would be jumping at the opportunity to allow couples who genuinely want to get married to do so. But unfortunately, petty small-mindedness prevails.
John Hartog, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

As a gay man, and a human, I think we should have the right to a declaration of partnership. This should be equal to marriage in all legal/financial respects. However, to call it 'marriage' is a mistake because it implies it has some form of religious significance, and this just gives right-wingers and religious organisations a stick to beat us with. The U.S. and the Bush administration is showing us once again what a hypocritical and schizophrenic 'free' society it really represents.
Richard, London UK

What other people do down the street does affect us in ways we cannot possibly fathom Brent, Toronto, Canada

What may appear as right and rational is not always so. The wisdom in granting gays the right to marry seems apparent. But it opens up a whole litany of other issues which, when considered today, we would not accept but, when considered in the light of pushing the definition of established institutions, jeopardizes the foundation of our society. The reality is, what other people do down the street does affect us in ways we cannot possibly fathom today.
Brent, Toronto, Canada

Until the Middle Ages, marriages were a secular service conducted outside the church. That's why we have Lych Gates at the border of 'holy land'. Marriage was originally a purely legal construct, and as such we enlightened 21st century types can define it how we choose. Bigots can and will continue to use their own definition of course - and justify it by putting words in God's mouth.
Justin Rowles, Southampton

Gay Marriage is not banned. Gays and Lesbians may wed at any number of modern churches and religious houses by clergy. This controversy is over civil marriages between same-sex couples, which should not be banned as long as heterosexual couples are allowed it: however, civil marriage for anyone is an outmoded arrangement, the call for which reveals the serious lack of social justice the US is guilty of ignoring. Gays are demanding civil marriage for civil benefits, which a modern state should give to all regardless of marriage.
Lowell Denny, Oakland, CA. USA

I doubt the USA will fall apart if people who love each other are allowed the same freedoms as everyone else Terry Angelo, Long Island, New York

It is ridiculous that anyone wants to use the constitution, which guarantees freedom, liberty and equality, to deny rights to others because of their sexual preference. What's the big deal about people who love each other getting married? If churches don't want to perform the ceremony, that's their business. But gays should be allowed to wed in civil ceremonies. I doubt the USA will fall apart if people who love each other are allowed the same freedoms as everyone else.
Terry Angelo, Long Island, New York

I am heterosexual and married. It had nothing to do with religion. No religious ceremony was involved. I was declaring my love for my partner. What is it in that description that excludes homosexuals? Cos if they can't get married because of religion, then neither should I have been able to.
Katherine, London, UK

President Bush's decision is absurd and dangerous, though hardly shocking. Are reactionary measures of state to safeguard "morality" in social relations any way of ending confusion of any sort? They can only divide and polarise society further. The mayor of San Francisco is a brave man with vision, which is more than can be said about his president.
Indra Sengupta, Heidelberg, Germany

"Protecting marriage" has become a euphemistic rallying cry for homophobes in the United States, just as "States' Rights" was a rallying cry for racists a generation ago. With the benefit of hindsight, many of those who oppose gay marriage now or vacillate on the issue will realize the inherent injustice of their position ten or twenty years from now... unfortunately, they can cause great harm in the meantime.
Michal Zapendowski, Providence, RI, USA

Where is the separation between church and state? Dan Curtis, Rochester, NY

I am a political science major at a university here in "America". Where is the separation between church and state? How is it that a president that I didn't vote for (and the majority of Americans didn't vote for) can impose his religious beliefs on a "secular" nation??? It's completely absurd. Anybody who uses "god" as a reason to prevent (tax-paying, law-abiding) people from enjoying the same rights as their fellow citizens. The real issue is going to be, if the boy king wins this next election, he gets to appoint two supreme court justices. We all know what that means, no more abortions, no more gay marriages, and the "endorsement of constitutionality" of the Patriot Act...
Dan Curtis, Rochester, NY; USA

No! America has already struggled with segregation and we all saw how well that worked. Why is Bush taking us back in time? It's a new millennium, let's act like it!
Adriyn H., Oregon, USA

Let them get married if they want - but people have to understand that the Christian leaders in the US must decide if they can do it in a church. Its got nothing to do with atheists or the US government, which after all is secular.
Richard, UK

Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.
Michael Kennedy, US

Discrimination is wrong Homer, Tucson

It is wrong to deny tax-paying citizens the same rights you can get with a five minute Las Vegas wedding. Last week I was told my new insurance policy doesn't cover gay partners- although I have to pay in like everybody else. Discrimination is wrong.
Homer, Tucson, Arizona, USA

If we take away religious, bigotry and political motives no one would have an issue. The fact is if two people love each other they should be allowed to be called a couple regardless of whether it is a same sex relationship or not.
James Lloyd, Haarlem, The Netherlands

Perhaps a more important question should be that should a country advocating freedom and democracy decide who you CAN and CAN NOT marry?
Eric Pritchett, Los Angeles, CA

What will this say about our country? In the 1970's we couldn't push through an Equal Rights Amendment for women to the US Constitution, but a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage can?
Caroline, New Jersey, USA

Where is the threat of gay people who clearly love each other wanting to commit to each other? Mary Ann, NY USA

I don't understand why gay marriage is such a problem. Supporters of traditional marriage argue family values and understanding. That is just what the gay community wants. 1966 blacks and whites could not marry. 1900 Catholics and Protestants could not marry. The world is changing. Where is the threat of gay people who clearly love each other wanting to commit to each other? Ridiculous.
Mary Ann, NY USA

I think this is an issue of separation between church and state. Maybe the US government has made a mistake in calling the Civil Union between men and women marriage. Maybe on your licence to marry, it should be a Civil Union license, but when you go to your church you get married. I think this is a religious which should stay out of government and in the church.
Katy Olson, Minneapolis MN, USA

I think that it is really pathetic to have so little faith in mankind as to ban gay marriage.
RS Lodh, Bonn, Germany

Same sex couples living together should have the same legal rights in terms of tax, inheritance, etc. as married couples, but it is simply inaccurate to pretend that it is marriage. Marriage is about providing a stable platform for a couple to have and rear children. This requires one male and one female.
Albert, UK

There's nothing discriminatory in banning gay marriage. By definition marriage is union of man and woman. Other all unions should find their own name.
Sam, Germany

Frankly, I don't see the problem behind simply calling them "civil unions" or what have you. If it is a matter of upholding the sanctity of "marriage", which I am for, then why not just call it something else and have the same legalities?
Derek KGB, Atlanta, GA, USA

Why shouldn't gays and lesbians have the same rights to be miserable as the rest of us? I've been married and divorced three times. Let them have a go at it! Maybe they can teach us something.
Janet Breid, Columbia, Missouri, USA

You'd think that Mr Bush had more pressing problems, like sorting out the messes from two invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and creating some of the 2.2 million jobs lost during his tenure.
Mark, Dublin

Why not give the word "marriage" back to the religious folks and attach all legal benefits and responsibilities to "civil unions" that any two consenting adults can enter? Then, each couple can decide whether they want the religious ceremony, the legal status or both.
Erin, Philadelphia, USA

What many people understand is that in the US, there are different social and financial mechanisms surrounding marriage. Widows and widower's receive a deceased spouse's state pension, for example, and it also affects tax rates based on the fact that many married couples have one stay-at-home party. Allowing gay marriage to go hand in hand with legal/financial benefits would have a large impact on the treasury.
Katie, in UK, from US

Who is anyone to question another persons love and commitment to another person Clare, London

I think it's the wrong move and giving the wrong message to a supposedly Democratic land. People that know they are gay, will always know they are gay, regardless of others opinions, religious or otherwise. Who is anyone to question another persons love and commitment to another person.
Clare, London

A ban on same-sex marriages is nothing short of discrimination. Marriage may have been borne out of a religious ceremony, but in today's society it is more about showing commitment to a partner than it is about God. Don't bring God into this argument - marriage and religion are two very different things.
Mike Hall, Northampton, UK

The US Constitution specifically prohibits discrimination of all kinds, yet for some reason, American history is littered with neglecting the very documents the US was founded on. People who are against gay marriage are, I feel, much the same as those who supported segregation in past times. How little we learn from history.
Douglas, Manchester, UK (American ex-pat)

If we did everything based on the bible, we'd be stoning people, killing people - using the Bible as a basis for opposing gay marriage is pointless. It seems to me that people should save their energy to fight war, poverty and other injustice. Gay marriage is an expression of love between two people. I support it and so does our Constitution.
Lucia, Las Vegas, USA

It can't be called unnatural. Unreproductive, yes but not unnatural Tomas, Cambridge

Homosexuality occurs quite frequently in nature and so I can't help feeling this means that it can't be called unnatural. Unreproductive, yes but not unnatural. I can see why it was frowned upon when humanity was in constant fear of its existence as the more offspring, the greater the survival chance but now it seems quite bigoted to hold anything against a loving couple of any sex.
Tomas, Cambridge

There is no reason that a marriage should affect anyone other than those people involved. If you don't believe in gay marriages, don't try and marry someone of your own sex.
Mike, NJ, USA

Marriage should be between one man and one woman. However people do need to be tolerant. If the government chooses to allow people with alternative lifestyles to form a union, then they should not use the term marriage. A new legalistic term, possibly derived from Latin language, should be made to denote all unions of any kind, across the board. Thus separating the institution of marriage from the government and leaving it a solely religious activity.
GM, USA

I have yet to hear an even partially convincing argument about how gay marriages will affect anybody but gay couples. Please explain how your marriage or your family will be hurt by a gay married couple down the street. God has no place in this debate. The United States is not a theocracy with George W. Bush as the Supreme Leader. What could be more immoral than desperately trying to keep some Americans in a second-class citizen status? Future generations will look at those opposing equal rights for gay Americans with contempt. These are the same people who opposed equal rights for black Americans.
Shawn, Washington, DC, USA

Amazingly unconstitutional Mike, Dallas, TX

Amazingly unconstitutional. I think marriage is about the union of people who love each other. Most often it happens between male and female. That cannot be the reason, however, to deny the right of the union to same-sex couples. It has been very unfortunate that people with non-traditional sexual preferences have been denied the rights of civil union. Do people get married because they are male and female, or because they love each other? If one defines that marriage has to include both then one implicitly states that same-sex people cannot fall in love with each other. That is very fascist.
Mike, Dallas, TX

So called gay marriages do not exist in the sight of the lord. The only thing gays want to do is show commitment to each other which I find abhorrent but its there so I have to have it shoved down my throat at every day. If gays were treated like straights they would in a lot of cases be done for benefit fraud as they are living together as a couple and claiming benefit as singles. The law need to change to counter this but as for gay marriage NO NO NO.
Amos, Devon

How many people really care what religion says anymore? By no means a majority. Either make marriage a legal relationship anyone can be a part of, irrespective of their sexual polarity, or ban it altogether and let's have a contractual arrangement. Unfortunately, state religions and equality are, and always have been, mutually opposed.
Dave E, Lincoln, UK

Constitutional amendments that actually limit, as opposed to expanding, civil rights are, thus far, unheard of. I think we begin a long trip in the wrong direction if we begin to change our constitution to reduce the freedoms of the people. Gay marriage harms nothing but the sensibilities of the superstitious few.
Seth Magle, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA

I have no problem with a change in the law to give homosexual partners certain legal rights, but marriage is a legal union between a man and a woman. The concept simply does not apply. Frankly it's as absurd as someone wanting to marry their pet cat!
Alan, Blackpool, UK

I have no particular interest in gay marriage either way - although I note most heterosexual people are giving up on it! But to change the Constitution for this is nonsense - what about outlawing child poverty or human rights abuses or criminal acts by Americans abroad? Bush has a problem with prioritisation.
Ally, Dublin

After visiting SF City Hall to watch hundreds of happy couples commit themselves to one another in such a formal setting, I cannot understand how the Christian Right and their puppet, Bush, can be so mean-spirited. People should look in the mirror for solutions to the breakdown of heterosexual marriage and not lay the blame on the gay community.
Robert Miller, San Francisco, CA USA

Legally it should not be banned. If specific religions want to ban gay marriages under their banner then fine. No one is (more like - should be) forced to follow religion but we are all forced to follow the law.
Dale, Newcastle, UK

This is George Bush junior showing his true colours Neil, Wrexham, Wales

This is George Bush junior showing his true colours. This is something he knows nothing about, doesn't affect him yet it will influence many peoples' lives in America - it's bigotry plain and simple.
Neil, Wrexham, Wales

If two people of legal age and possessed of judicial capacity wish to make a serious, societal-approved commitment, then so be it. Another point: allowing gays 'civil unions' gives them few of the actual benefits of that committed relationship. That can be defined as discriminatory. The proposed Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage can be construed as a milestone of sorts - the first time a right has been taken away from a segment of the US population.
Walter, USA

Yes, of course gay couples should be allowed to marry. When two people love each other they should be able to tie the knot regardless of their gender. I challenge anyone to give me one good, rational reason why this should not be the case. The religious beliefs of the few should not control the law.
Jon, UK

Without compromise, nothing will change Jeremy, Regina, Canada

Unfortunately both sides of the debate are dominated by extremists: those on the far left who will accept nothing less than gay marriage, rejecting civil unions as inadequate, and those on the religious right who reject not only marriage but anything else that would suggest legitimacy for gay relationships, including civil unions. The ultimate losers as a result of this will be gays themselves, who will lose out on the ability to enjoy the legal rights conferred by civil unions (which would be the same as in actual marriage - just without that title), and instead will be left out in the cold completely. Without compromise, nothing will change.
Jeremy, Regina, Canada

Society as a whole is very patient. The "Silent Majority", as it is called, bides it's time (procrastinates actually), and than it reacts with sudden vehemence. The backlash has begun because the general populace (heterosexual), which is in fact the vast majority of people, feels as if a specific segment of society is now dictating what is and isn't acceptable to the society as a whole. Its a fine line any minority walks when sweeping change of an accepted "norm" is (for lack of a better word) tinkered with.
Gil, Hawaii, USA

Yes, it is wrong by definition and is diametrically opposed to the way God wants us to live.
Johnny, Ely, UK

Gay couples have as much right as anyone else to a marriage. The only real question is the religious aspect, but with more and more people being married in registry offices etc it would be blatantly discriminatory to ban gay couples from being wed.
James McEnaney, Glasgow, Scotland