I was amazed at Emily Kelly’s ability to acutely describe “both” sides of gay marriage without at all considering the point of view of homosexuals, i.e. the only people in the country directly affected by gay marriage laws. I will agree that the state should keep out of religious affairs (and vice versa).  Remember, this also extends to gay-friendly churches.  But while religious marriage and marriage officiated by the government often coincide, they don’t need to as Emily Kelly seems to believe. Besides, any self respecting GLBT person would not have any desire to allow any anti-gay institution to officiate his or her wedding.  It is perfectly legal for heterosexual adults to obtain a marriage license without getting married in a church, so why can’t I, as a gay man, partake in obtaining the same legal, tax, visitation, etc., rights and responsibilities of being someone’s husband? Oh, that’s right, because it’s immoral and unnatural.

Paul Brothers

senior, arts applications