Gay marriage:

  • AG suggests bill: same-sex benefits without marriage | Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly yesterday said he believes the Supreme Judicial Court's decision on gay marriage does not require the state to issue traditional marriage licenses to gay couples, and suggested the Legislature should test the ruling with a bill that offers same-sex couples full protections and benefits without allowing them to marry. (The Boston Globe)

  • A common missed conception | Why religious people are against gay marriage. (Steven Waldman, Slate)

  • A question of civil rights | Sodom and Gomorrah will not spring forth fully formed along the streets of America should this nation develop legal recognition for gay couples who want the same civil rights as straight couples. Our churches will not evaporate into the ether. (J.R. Labbe, Fort Worth Star-Telegram)

  • Amid acceptance of gays, a split on marriage issue | As friends, work colleagues and lunch buddies, Niema Faulkner and Helene Hall never knew how differently they viewed gay marriages until a Massachusetts court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marry under the state's Constitution. (The New York Times)

  • Court decision unites foes of many stripes | The state Supreme Judicial Court's support for gay marriage in Massachusetts has thrust together Christians who normally can't even agree on what books belong in the Bible. (Boston Herald)

  • Gay marriage issue dominates U.S. Sunday news interview shows | Congressional opponents of same-sex marriages say a constitutional amendment will be needed to safeguard the institution of matrimony in the United States, following a recent controversial state supreme court decision. (Voice of America)

  • Gay marriage ruling draws derision, praise | Some denounced same-sex marriage as "an abomination," an affront to every message spelled out in the word of God. Others said, however, that times have changed, that the old notions of relationships and families no longer hold. And still others drew a sharp distinction, saying that a same-sex union may be permissible at city hall but certainly not within their own congregations. (The Washington Post)

Subscriber access only You have reached the end of this Article Preview

To continue reading, subscribe now. Subscribers have full digital access.