have the courage to post your entire name if you're going to make ignorant bone-head posts like that.

Always nice to see people respond to a comment with name calling.

Paz has a point. People calling him/her names are not “evolved” enough yet.
Marrying outside your class, culture, race, same sex was outrageous, bone-headed in the past. But now we are more "Evolved".

Current mental disorders (Objectification for example) will soon be declared a lifestyle choice. Men, women and trans/multi-gender individuals will openly marry/love their TiVo’s or the latest generation sex robot (insert interchangeable parts jokes here :__)

Human-animal couples will be as common as Man-Man, Man-Boy, Woman-Woman, Woman-Girl marriages. Sounds crazy now... but we have not "evolved" or been brain washed into thinking its normal/health for society.

Happy Evolving (or is it Devolving/degenerating).

There was no name-calling, Dev. Ed didn't call "Paz" a name.

Here's an idea -- LEARN TO READ! And don't tell us you do know how to read because if you did, you'd know that you are violating Patch's TOS by only using your first name. Oh. Here come the excuses why you won't.

Uhm Troy,
categorizing a post as an "ignorant bone head post" fits my description of name calling.

Of course it does, James. Because when it comes to being uneducated, you're right-on-the-money.

The description was that of the comment, not of the person. Consider yourself schooled.

Troy,
According to you it's only name calling if the post writes itself? Sorry Troy, the post is the opinion of its poster. Calling a post a name is calling its author a name. If you can tell me my level of education then you might have a right to pronounce on it but otherwise I would say you are categorizing me without reference to any facts.

"We are in no way designed to be with the same sex?"
Uhh...people are not created in a lab. You've been watching too much SyFy.

Such a tough kid behind that keyboard, ain't ya?
Perhaps your parents need to disconnect the internet access from their basement.

flat out: your post was, is and will continue to be ignorant, bonehead drivel. your comment "people make a choice to be gay" puts you in a class of cretins that deserve no recognition. no wonder you're afraid to use you name. or do you know what it is ? check inside your collar, maybe your mom wrote it there.

Paz, if that's your belief then why does God make heterosexual couples infertile every day? People don't choose to be gay. What makes you think that anyone would want to "make" themselves different so that they could be mistreated by people like you? And just because there are gay people out there doesn't mean there aren't heterosexual people out there too who are fruitful and multiplying. Look at the Duggar's.

Susan - I wish I could have said it exactly as you did. "sadly and mistakenly many christians seem to think discrimination and exclusion are justified by their faith" There is only one judge, and he is not on this earth.

Unfortunately separation of church and state has been misinterpreted from its original context in order to fit many agendas in an attempt to reshape this country. Also I have been involved in this discussion both here in Stow and in the Falls over this issue at the Nat and have seen hate and intolerance mostly from those supporting homosexual marriage since they refuse to accept that many of us cannot accept changing of the traditional definition of marriage in order push forward this agenda. In all the meetings I have been in there was never any hate expressed or judgement made of or towards gay people and their activities since as has been stated in this feedabck that is only for God to judge not man. We as Christians believe that we should reach out in love to all but we cannot sacrifice our core beliefs and the traditional definition of marriage is one of those core beliefs.

I do applaud President Obama for stating his position although I do not agree with it. This allows everyone to make an informed choice when voting this fall based on their own beliefs. It is unfortunate this was not the case in Stow as I have stated in previous articles.

I agree with Larry on this one. Furthermore, the first Amendment allows freedom of speech and religion. So our forefathers, wanted religion (i.e. God, Bible, Godly principles), even encouraged it to be a part of public discourse. You have the right to disagree with someone’s religious views, but you do not have the right to suppress it or discredit it as irrelevant public policy discussion. This is what appears to be taking place.

Debbie this CNN article you reference is distorting what the Bible actually teaches on this topic. Proponents of immorality of all kinds will do almost anything to justify what they want, even condone what God calls sin. It is interesting what the “BIBLE” teaches on this topic is a true statement, one I hope you will truly research.

www.thebible.net/modules.php?name=Read&itemid=81&cat=9

The Bible does apply to this discussion, but let's make sure we quote it accurately. You are not standing for equality or sanctity of marriage, for God’s ways are best and you are endorsing something outside of God’s ways. You are not doing "Just as Jesus did" for Jesus specifically addressed marriage as being between one man and one woman and referenced Adam and Eve. So I am not sure who you are standing with, but you are not standing with Jesus.