I think it's sad that "marriage equality" seems to only apply to homosexuals. What about a man who wants more than one wife, or a woman who wants more than one husband? Why are they denied the same privileges, if most of us seem to be in agreement that homosexuals ought to be lawfully allowed to marry?

Shouldn't "marriage equality" apply to all groups, and not just one or two groups? It seems very narrow, for people who claim to be so open-minded.

I might also add that I don't see how we've gotten to a point in the United States where we look to Washington, D.C. to answer all of our problems. Why do they need to validate everything for us? Why is marriage an issue of federal jurisdiction in the first place? People ought to marry whoever or whomever they choose in their home or in their church, and it's not the federal governments business whatsoever.

I say leave it entirely to the states, or leave it entirely to individuals to do what they choose. I'm very concerned that so many people are over-looking the dangerous road we've taken in this country. We seem to have this insatiable desire to have distant politicians decide things for us, and it's the exactly the opposite of how things ought to be.

Oh, those are completely separate things.  Please see my other post.

Ah, most significant rights of marriage, a whole 1,000+ plus only come from the Federal Government.  That is why it has to be a federal case. 

Let's say Billy and Kelly go in for a marriage license.  They all check through as available and such, but ops, the only thing that would stop their marriage in California yesterday was their gender.  If they are male-female they could get married, but if female-female yesterday they could not.  Now that single barrier of gender can no longer determined their ability to wed each other.

The reason is called Marriage Equality, because it grants equal marriage rights to both genders. 

A man could marry a man or a woman, and visa versa.

Rights don't come from governments.  That is a total fallacy.  As a society, we may have ceded rights to governments over the years, but that's not where they're derived from.  You also haven't explained at all my first point, which is that it's hypocritical for people who support "marriage equality" to define it only as manogomous heterosexuals and homosexuals.  It should indeed include all groups of those in this country who wish to marry, if it is the Federal government that we're asking to allow us the priviledge to marry whomever we choose. 

People cheering for "marriage equality" but only including homosexuals is just as bad as old, homophobic people not wanting gay people to get married.

Oh, those are completely separate things.  Please see my other post.

Ah, most significant rights of marriage, a whole 1,000+ plus only come from the Federal Government.  That is why it has to be a federal case. 

Let's say Billy and Kelly go in for a marriage license.  They all check through as available and such, but ops, the only thing that would stop their marriage in California yesterday was their gender.  If they are male-female they could get married, but if female-female yesterday they could not.  Now that single barrier of gender can no longer determined their ability to wed each other.

The reason is called Marriage Equality, because it grants equal marriage rights to both genders. 

A man could marry a man or a woman, and visa versa.