Continued from above

Taken off BBC Online:

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

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

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

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

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 - 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

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

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

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

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