For the most part.
There is a small, but vocal group of people expressing outrage about gay marriage.
Most of the people I know who oppose it do their best to respect other people. Many of them have resigned themselves to the fact that while this may be something they don't agree with, it is happening.
Some haven't. There are people who take it and run with it, citing bible verses and tradition, many of which who clearly don't understand the most basic functions of our government. The people who claim they aren't dictating how anyone else should live their lives, yet in the same breath would deny rights purely based on someone's sexual orientation. Then there are all the people who'll hop on any current issue, just to distort it with their own agendas.
If you're tired of reading about gay rights, too bad.
People like me will stop talking about it when there is nothing to talk about anymore.
People like me will stop talking about it when everyone is treated equally in the eyes of the law.
People can debate gay marriage endlessly on Facebook and Twitter, on political television shows, on blogs like this one, but at the end of the day, very little of what anyone thinks matters anymore.
Public opinion doesn't much matter anymore. Votes are irrelevant now. Swaying the polls with money funneled by conservative churches won't do any good. You can quote all the bible verses you want and it will get you nowhere.
The cases are at the Supreme Court, where the constitutionality of the laws are at issue.
Constitutionality has nothing to do with popular opinion. Absolutely nothing. In fact, the decisions handed down by the court quite often go against what the majority wants, for an important reason.
That reason is simple: the will of the majority is not always right. It is not always in line with the Constitution. It's often quite contrary.
Just a few generations ago, interracial marriage was forbidden, schools were segregated, at the will of the majority.
We live in a Constitutional Democratic Republic. It's not just a democracy, where the will of the majority wins out. Our founders were smarter than that. They understood the concept of the tyranny of the majority, and carefully drafted the Constitution to ensure there would be balancing interests. They created ways to undo the will of the many. To protect the interests of those without large and imposing numbers. To protect the rights of those marginalized by society.
To further protect the rights of those who would be oppressed, the founders established the Supreme Court and gave it the final say on the interpretation of the Constitution.
Some make the argument that gay marriage goes against God. Although many people seem to believe so, this nation was not founded on Christian beliefs. It is founded on the freedom to believe whatever you want, to practice or not practice whatever faith you choose. Consequently, the laws are not to be dictated by religion. The separation of church and state is well established. Quoting bible verses will get you nowhere in a court of law, a court charged with interpreting a document which guarantees freedom and equality to all citizens.
Some make the argument that gay marriage shouldn't be legal simply for the sake of tradition. To them I present this quote, taken from the Jefferson Memorial, voiced by one of the founders of our nation.
I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors. ~Thomas Jefferson
Some make the argument that marriage exists solely for the purpose of procreation. Using that logic, infertile couples, those who choose not to have children and those marry past the point of menopause should also be denied equal rights.
Some make the argument that civil unions are the same as marriage. That they carry all the same legal rights and responsibilities. The court struck down a claim of separate but equal before, and I can't imagine they wold uphold the same basic premise in any other situation. Additionally, so long as states are permitted to refuse to acknowledge marriages recognized in other states, there is no transferability here. My marriage is recognized by every state in the union, but currently there is no requirement that one state recognize a gay marriage deemed legal elsewhere. We live in a transient society where people relocate all the time for work. They should be able to take their marriages with them.
Some make the argument that homosexuality is against nature. Yet, humans are one of hundreds of species with documented cases of homosexuality. It's not against nature at all, in fact nature supports it's existence.
Some make the argument that keeping marriage between men and women will preserve family values. When the divorce rate hovers near 50% and something like 70% of married partners have affairs, I struggle to see how that can even make sense. Just by virtue of the fact that they are straight, people are allowed to enter and exit marriage whenever they see fit, yet couples who've been dedicated to one another for decades are not allowed to marry at all because they are the same gender.
I trust in the Court to come to the right decision. To interpret the Constitution as it should be. To recognize that sexual orientation is no different than the color of someone's skin. One is no better than another, no more deserving of equal application of the law.
equal (adjective) \ˈē-kwəl\
a (1) : of the same measure, quantity, amount, or number as another
(2) : identical in mathematical value or logical denotation : equivalent
b : like in quality, nature, or status
c : like for each member of a group, class, or society