Why not. I am in favor of gay marriage

It's not Gay Marriage...it's marriage equality...nothing more, nothing less. it's about time.

The local Patch should cover only local events. This news is now all over the web and broadcast media. So I receive a "breaking news alert" email from the Patch regarding this. Totally annoying. Next false alarm like this from the Patch and I'll hit the road (unsubscribe).

Both sodomy and Obama are obaminations. May BOzo and Joe "Braindead" Biden elope to S.F. and live happily ever after.

I think you left off some possible choices, like "I support gay marriage, but I'm afraid Obama is hurting his chances for re-election by taking a firm position at this point.

This is a state's rights issue as written in the 10th Amendment. The federal government should concentrate on other issues in their purview off responsibility. This makes as much sense as the Cranford Commissioners focusing on feeding the wildlife.

The fact that this is an issue is just sad. Why would you create a law that prevented people from loving each other? Is that what Jesus would do?

For a country that regards itself as THE "world leader", I'm surprised that this debate even exists in 2012. Pops Ferguson - Do you really think someone wakes up one day and decides "hmmmm, today's a good day to turn gay"? Guess, what, it's not a choice!

Thank you President Obama for striking a blow against bigotry and hate by courageously showing your support for marriage equality. Yesterday North Carolina voted for intolerance. Today you stood in support of tolerance for those who love each other. Thank you.

Marriage should be a serious commitment between two people regardless of sexual orientation.

Let's see, record unemployment, federal debt that's going to take GENERATIONS to pay, deplorable international policy and what is our "fearless leader" going on about...Gay marriage. While this is an important topic, with the economy in the tank this is the LEAST of our problems. Way to divert the spotlight off your FAILED polices Mr. President.

The federal debt & mess that Pres. Obama inherited from GW Bush/ Dick Cheney has nothing to do with this topic

The blatant hubris of a Government, gripped by a compulsion to play a role in so personal a decision, disgusts me. There are so many problems Government should be working to solve, so many problems caused by ineffective and ineffectual Government, yet all this time, energy, and resources go to interfering in citizens' personal and private lives.

The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a community against his will is to prevent harm to others. Preventing two loving individuals from public declaring their commitment to one another does not qualify as a legitimate use of state power.

Good day for hope for civil liberties for all. Thank you President Obama!

This is only the 4th time he changed his view since he first ran for office.
Why doesn't the media report that?

Liar, liar, liar

Thankfully he just handed the swing states and many independents to Romney.

Thank you President Obama...now, can I get a tax break since I don't have the right to marry in my own state?

I really don't have an issue with anyone marring whom they love...I have more of an issue with someone who marries the opposite sex and is in the closet, because eventually that closet gets open and unfortunately someone usually gets hurt. Therefore it is better to let people be whom they are~

So many shallow opinions are thrown around. What is the basis for accepting homosexuality, let alone homosexual marriage? Is your basis philosophical? Physiological? Religious? Hedonic?
You don't have to have sex with everyone/everything you love. I love my grandmother, but I ought not to have sex with her, especially since she's dead. Or should we "tolerate" incest and necrophilia? I love my dogs, but I ought not to have sex with them. Or should we "tolerate" bestiality? Isn't heterosexual polygamy more natural than homosexuality? Why should homosexuality be tolerated and not pedophilia? Aren’t pedophiles just being who they are?
It’s pretty clear what the purpose of the reproductive organs is. A book of matches is primarily for lighting candles, cigarettes, a grill, etc. But, hey! What if I light a forest fire, or set my neighbor’s house on fire? Just because there are alternative uses for things doesn’t make those things tolerable.
So, are our morals supposed to “evolve” every time another group actively promotes a current taboo?
Let’s have a little more thought go into comments on such a hot button issue.
By the way, our tax code sucks. And more government isn’t going to increase freedom.

Why, thank you, Alpha.
Either there are moral absolutes, or all is relative. Either you draw a line around what is tolerable, or valued, or anything goes. Those who are just outside the circle of toleration think everyone inside is intolerant. OK. Suppose Obama's evolving morals evolve to the point where he thinks it's his right to transfer your property to someone else or close down your church's charitable institutions or ... oh wait, he's already there. Alright then,what if Obama were to mandate that all children from the age of 4 years must watch live (safe) sex shows, heterosexual and homosexual, on, say, Sunday mornings so that they grow up to be as (safe), evolved and tolerant as he is. Surely, that's a very good thing, even worthy of a Nobel prize. What? You don't think that's such a good idea? You must be ... intolerant!

I was born and raised in NJ and left years ago. I stay in touch with what's going on in my home state and find that it has become more liberal than when I lived there. I'm ever so happy to out from under that yoke; they talk about freedom but continue to enact more laws and encourage government to grow like the cancer it has become. The NJ motto should be "A Law for Everything." How the heck did Christie ever get elected as governor? Surely he didn't win the vote in Summit! The only thing I miss about NJ is the Shore and a good homegrown Jersey tomato. Adios from Alpha2041

OMG...really? no one knew he'd do this either before or during his second term because it's the right thing to do? As for changing his mind..it's called evolving, not flip flopping. Everything a career politician does ''political'' depending how you want to apply a definition of a word to a persons actions or beliefs. People that are against any type of equality are archaic. People that say it's against their religion, then just don't allow it in your CHURCH. As for what NC did, sneaking an ammendmant onto a primary, that's as 1960s as you can get from keeping African Americans from voting. As for mr cynic...if you find it that insensitive to have a local blog post something like that and my bets are you were thinking it was going to be something tragic, be grateful it wasn't a tsunami or a shooting at an elementary school...Seriously, if that's the only thing you have to bitch about, I don't know whether your life is blessed or sad, because either way, talk about over reacting....
Congratulations to President Obama for doing something he knows could very well hurt his campaign....But he's a brilliant man and has two daughters where I'm sure they know he was being hypocritical by not finally stating how he truly feels in public when I'm sure he's stated differently in 'the house'.

I really find it funny when I read people's responses on this topic. My opinion is simple. Who gives a f@ck? If two people of the same sex want to marry, what business is it of mine? Wait, you say its wrong for moral or religious reasons? Wait, have you lived a completely moral life and have you never broken one or more of the ten commandments? Oh wait, you have? Then you are human like the rest of us and who are you to judge? Does everyone answer to you in the afterlife? Do you think Jesus would be as judgmental or critical of people? Oh wait, my flaws, sins, or personal weakness aren't as bad as THAT? Oh yeah? Says who? Lets pick and choose what we want from the Bible and hold what makes us look better against others. How about John 8:7? Reminder needed? Fine, If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her. No, that is not applicable here. Not when it comes to homosexuality, right? Makes sense to me, lets pick and choose what we like from the Bible and disgard the rest. Listen, whether you like it or not, its here to stay. And we live in America. The land of the free and home of the brave. So you should be free and brave enough to be whoever you want to be and let others do the same. Gay Marriage included. Its my humble opinion, carry on your holier thou agruments.

You certainly can come to your own moral positions in life, but you have no right to force the larger society to accept them. "Equality" "evolution" and "tolerance" are badly abused terms here. Next, polygamists, arsonists, necrophyliacs, bestialists and others will be demanding equality and toleration. Are you for those things? If not, why not? What is the basis of your ruling some things acceptable and others unacceptable? As I mentioned, for some this is philosophical, for others religious, for still others financial(?), etc.

Upon what great thinker, school of thought or authority do you base your moral position?

If it's just personal, and the larger society doesn't share your moral position, then please consider that your homosexual rights advocacy impinges upon the values that many others hold dear. The larger society doesn't have to accept what it believes will undermine it.

How dare you compare 2 consenting adults who want to be recognized and have equal rights as heterosexuals have to having sex with dead people or other animals I assume that's what you mean and you have a typo, that can't give their consent. You're an abomination of intellect using those comparisons. The only people FORCING discrimination are the idiots in NC and the extreme conservatives who have nothing to add to an intelligent conversation except misquotes from a bible...I don't care what church wants to recognize marriage equality, but I'll be damned if I'll let the government flat out exclude people from equal rights based on whom they want to marry. Tom, you're ridiculous, no one has to share my moral position anymore than share yours..but protection and rights is the governments JOB. The values that the others hold so dear are based in religion and myth, not in fact, compassion or the equal rights people have under the law. Your comparisons only prove how uninformed, and unworthy your argument is: it's the same thing racists said of interracial couples..OH..and the same states that are so holding onto those ''dear'' values have to now post on websites whether it's still legal to marry your cousin in each county..........yaaaaaaaaa, good examples.

This is not a productive discussion because neither side will ever convince the other. However, the fact remains that every poll indicates that a majority of Americans favor legalizing same-sex marriage. Further, among persons under the age of 35, support for same-sex marriage is greater than 2 to 1. Clearly, this issue will age-out or fade away within a generation or less. What disturbs me most about the issue is that our Governor thinks the people should decide the issue in a referendum. He knows what the result will be but a referendum gets him off the hook with his conservative buddies. A former U.S. Attorney who thinks that the public should vote on who is entitled to basic civil rights. Very comforting.

You are missing the point. If you can hold arson, necrophilia and bestiality as intolerable, then you have to accept that others can hold homosexuality as intolerable. It's a matter of degrees. I certainly wasn't equating any one of those with another. The point is that there are already boundaries drawn in society. If the society wants to maintain those boundaries for what they believe is for the good of society, then they will. That you want society to change established boundaries is fine. You only need a majority of the people to abandon their current thinking, traditions and religious beliefs. Or evolve them, as you prefer.

I’ve already made it clear that I think the tax code stinks. I wouldn’t mind at all if homosexual couples got better treatment from the IRS. Marriage is a loaded word, though. I personally don't want or need to know what everyone is doing in their private lives. But when you go after something that carries as much tradition and religious freight as marriage, you’re going to meet resistance.

There will be bigotry, resentment and other antisocial feelings as long as people act out and get in each other’s faces. Modesty goes a long way toward building social harmony.

No one is afraid of resistance...people will have that, YOU however putting homosexuals in the same category as law breakers -- no one has tolerance for arsons, necrophilia, rapists, etc....and no one has to agree with anything as long as equal rights aren't being violated, and denying marriage EQUALITY is doing just that. I don't care how deep rooted it is in someone's religion, NO ONE's religion holds a candle to the governments job to protect people's civil rights...it's that simple. So come up with something that's valid.

No, Derek, you are still missing the point and distorting my comments. Tolerance is a matter of degrees. Everyone draws the line somewhere.

What really interests me is your comment: NO ONE's religion holds a candle to the governments job to protect people's civil rights.

So, you think that it is government's role to shape society and not the other way around. Pardon me, but governments come and go. Society ... people ... just want to be left alone to live their lives as they choose. If you want government to put its boot on the neck of society to accept you, that's fine. I just doubt that the majority of citizens share your philosophy.

Society ... people ... just want to be left alone to live their lives as they choose. Only when it's to their was of thinking.....you don't like the FDA protecting drugs (although they take too long sometimes compared to the rest of the civilized world), you have problems with the EPA? Social Security? Medicare? safe bridges? Safe roads? Department of Insurance and Banking - every have a problem with an insurance company or bank and contact them and find your problem resolved in 24 hours? I have..You don't like Board of public utilities? Air port security (no matter how much of a pain in the ass it is, people feel somewhat safer), So NO people want government. I'm not distorting your comments, you are the one who chose poor examples of what you're trying to say ; Morality can't be legislated. Yes, in fact it can and has been.....heterosexuals have had the right to marry for centuries AND USUALLY TO MULTIPLE WOMEN AT THE SAME TIME...ROMNEY's religion still practice that...do I care how many wives he has ? NO. You're the one who put illegal activity with tolerance. I have no tolerance about some kid burning down the complex on St George Ave in Rahway or setting fires in Rahway, the kid needs help ..RELIGION by no means has a place in society to shape CIVIL rights. You go to your church and want to follow people who say they know what God wants, go ahead, ..those values you can follow in your home and in that church, no room for it though in CIVIL law.

Derek, it sounds like you place more trust in government to shape society than the members of society themselves. Well, OK. Suppose the November elections are a rout for Democrats, and the Presidency and Congress goes to the Republicans, and limited fedral government-type Republicans at that, what then? It really sounds like you are for a massive, authoritarian, central government that shapes society to your advantage in spite of and against the will of the majority.

As for the myriad government agencies, that only creates a nation of government dependents with less personal freedom and sovereignty.

Against the will of majority...bingo....the US government is to protect the minority as well as the majority. Of course govt shapes society, that's pretty much a given, govt teaches us to drive on the appropriate side of the street, that no child is left behind (cough cough), What sounds like to your perception as me wanting a massive, authoritarian central govt is you going way over the top, when all I said was people deserve equality, you're the one who read into it, dragged illegal activities and religion into the equation....you sound like a Fox News sound byte.

Equality isn't so black and white as you may want, Derek. Fight it all you want, but the mores of society ebb and flow, and they are moving to the right at the moment ... largely due to liberal overreach. In fact, one of Barack Obama's legacies is renewed interest in and advocacy for Constitutional, i.e. limited, federal government. But for Barack Obama, there would be no Tea Party movement.

This is why I said before that there will be bigotry, resentment and other antisocial feelings as long as people act out and get in each other’s faces. Modesty goes a long way toward building social harmony.

Modesty? You use that word along with social harmony while comparing the equality of those wanting to be married to criminals???? This is where you make no sense. Equality on the books vs how people respond to it is yet another matter, but at least it's a starting place. And quite frankly the movement towards the right is over and lost for people under the age of 35. There's room for Tea Party movement, it serves a purpose to those who align with it and for those of us who know it's exactly how not to be, how not to flat out lie and believe it cause I said so Sarah Palin. This country was founded on getting in faces of the opposition, The bush legacy did everything it could to divide this country, down to using 9-11 as a football rally and excuse to devastate Iraq. Boo. Be a tea party..it's a fabulous group of individuals who have been so misled by Fox news and lies and exaggerations. The social tide is hardly moving to the right, I have no idea how old you are, but as the boomers leave us, the movement will be very much more progressive..Romney as the only viable person to run against Obama is pretty much an indicator of what's not going to happen. And I don't fight or resist people, I accept everyone for whom they are and respect their opinions---when there's no pairing of people that are in love with criminals-and that Tom, is how you started the whole dialogue.

lol you contradict yourself again...''in this veing, it is good to have limits''...so, as I said, when you want gov't to set your limits , as long as they're in YOUR best interest and affect your life in some way, it's fine...but when it comes to something that has no bearing, all of a sudden, government should stay out. Govt job is security and safety of it's people, I'm pretty sure we're both happy people drive on the appropriate side of the road USUALLY. But when you bring into the equation equal rights, and throw illegal activity into it, you make assumption that they are the same. When one has nothing to do with the other. If you brought up interracial couples, women's right to vote, the black civil rights movement, YOU'D NEVER DARE UTTER THAT YOU TOLERATE AFRICAN AMERICANS...or maybe you would-I would hope you have seen the errors of our ways from slavery until now regarding white people's behavior towards blacks...but you wouldn't throw women or blacks into any category of adjectives that were illegal because your ''political correctness'' won't allow you to...But you put gays there because as of now it's a 50/50 chance you PC will allow you...not on a blog I'm on.... I never take what people write on blogs personally, i don't know you , you don't know me...i respect your opinions your way of living your life, as long as it's not stopping someone else from living theirs.

"I am puzzled. What are you deprived of, apart from equal treatment with respect to taxes and health benefits?"--------are you that ignorant...?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? you're the most insulting, ignorant, misinformed, arrogant individuals to ever write on a blog...I hope that's not name calling,,,,I MISSED IT? Whatever I missed in your posts could fit into an Ipod compared to what you've missed by your oblivious posts, which could fit in your 8 track player.

I don't need you to sympathize with me, nor persuade you to become my ally..your ignorance in and of itself shows fair minded people how poorly you state what you feel because you can't give examples on the subject using a level playing field. It's like Fox News...everything contrived, to the point of putting (D) under a (R) congressman when he supported the health insurance bill..that's NO mistake..nothing Rupert Murdoch has his greedy, criminal fingers is has ever been a mistake- even when he got busted..it's all connected, we're all connected..
As for deprivation: I won't ever feel deprived of anything I want. I am happily married, have a great family and fantastic friends as well as loyal business customers; I am happy, fulfilled, compassionate and generous. The fact that the government see's me as less than deserving of equal rights will never define who I am. It's only a matter of time and this conversation will not ever be needed...because my way will be the way, not yours. At some point the young people who are more evolved than you'll ever be, will be in charge, and understand the differences between us is what makes for a strong society. We WILL bridge this country back morally, ethically, spiritually and financially because our knowledge and use of modern technology has soared over the past 15 years more than the past 150 years..Unfortunately it seems it's the older people who abuse technology, not the younger ones..we see it as neutral, most see it as threat.

OK, suit yourself. We're probably boring everyone else anyway.

I was just about to suggest that Tom and derek get a room! ; )
Thanks, guys, for all your comments!

hahahaha:) as long as it involves an infinity pool, with cocktail servers in the pool and two bedroom suite, i'm cool. haha...peace