The following is a sample of editorial opinion from newspapers around the country about gay marriage and a proposed constitutional amendment to ban it:
This page firmly opposes a constitutional amendment to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Were such an amendment to be adopted, it would render moot a process of debate and decision-making that the American public, through their legislatures, must be permitted to have in the years ahead.
The Republican-American of Waterbury, Conn.
The far-left-wing homosexual mob is moving too far and too fast for mainstream America.
San Antonio Express-News
The question is: Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that gays have the right to privacy and equal protection under the Constitution, how can the government continue to sanction only male-female marriages?
The government should license civil unions that deal with practical issues involving children, property, health insurance and pension plans.
Churches, synagogues and mosques should determine who marries in a religious ceremony, separate and apart from the legal issues determined by the government.
The government would not be sanctioning gay marriages, but gay couples would have the legal protections of a civil union.
The Washington Times
Mr. Bush's decision to back the constitutional amendment defending marriage is good for the moral standing of the country -- and smart politics. There is nothing cynical about the president's endorsement of this amendment. Both his Christian faith and personal judgment long ago led him to the commonsensical conclusion that marriage can only be between a man and a woman.
The New York Times
President Bush's amendment would be the first adopted to stigmatize and exclude a group of Americans. Polls show that while a majority of Americans oppose gay marriage, many would prefer to allow the states to resolve the issue rather than adopting a constitutional amendment. They understand what President Bush does not: The Constitution is too important to be folded, spindled or mutilated for political gain.
Augusta (Ga.) Chronicle
Ban gay marriages.
San Francisco Chronicle
This nation's instinct has always been to end inequities and expand liberties, whether the issue is the abolition of slavery or the establishment of a woman's right to vote.
Even Americans who are uneasy about the notion of same-sex marriage should object to this assault on the Constitution.
The Arizona Republic
A constitutional amendment saps the debate over marriage of its essence. It is the wrong way to go.
Columnist Steve Chapman will return Tuesday.