In the case of a father-daughter relationship, what right does society have to stop such a marriage between 2 consenting adults? Why can’t they get the same benefits as a “married” couple?

It is quite simple, unless one buys in to the nonsense of this latest fallacious ism/movement.

It is a biological reality that a child can only be born from the union of a male and female, (including “test-tube” babies and the like, without being any more specific).

Since kids raised in a household of a committed relationship of a father plus mother is long proven to be the most beneficial to society in so many ways, it makes good sense to legislate (benefits for participating in) marriage to encourage parents to produce and raise optimally the next generation of productive citizens.

An “alternative relationship” is disqualified on both counts. So there is no more excuse to justify same-gender marriage than there would be for a mother-son relationship or an uncle-minor child relationship.

The biggest problem for those who do NOT subscribe to this pack of lies, however, is that our surroundings affect us and this “tolerance” will (if it hasn’t already begun to) insidiously creep in and corrupt even those who have no interest in these perversions.

So the democracy argument MIGHT go as far as what you do in private, but definitely not to force society to condone this perversion as legitimate and valid. And, yes, if you value the amoral and corrupt education and society that today’s and tomorrow’s children (besides for adults) will be exposed to, that might be one reason to care.

And, no, it has nothing to do with freedom of religion or any other freedom that we enjoy because practice of any religion within the bounds of the laws of the land that do not negatively affect anyone else should be tolerated by all as each can choose their their own (or could choose not to have a) faith; as opposed to same-gender marriage which goes against the law of the land for, in part, the above reasons, even if that law happened to have now been foolishly changed by legislators with the wool clearly pulled firmly over their eyes.

Only same gender relations between men. The prohibition regarding women is not explicitly stated and therefore carries no death penalty. And there is no prohibition at all for non-Jewish women.

Yes in principle, no in practice. Sales and payroll taxes are a small fraction of sales and payrolls; by comparison taxes on cigarettes are huge. Also, you will decrease employment and sales even more by laying off police officers firefighters, sanitation workers, health department workers, emergency medical service workers, transit workers, and other government employees who are essential to a healthy functioning society, and also in the long run by laying off teachers, medical researchers, parks department workers, and others who contribute to the general well being of society. You have to have taxes to pay them.

On one hand, the Torah is very clear that not only are such relationships absolutely prohibited, but G-d considers them an abomination and destructive. I don’t see how any Torah observant Jew can think or argue otherwise. On the other hand, we live in a democratic, secular country where the separation of church and state allows us great freedom and liberty to practice our religion and to live the lifestyle we so desire. It seems unfair and hypocritical for us to then turn around and wish to impose those same religious beliefs on others.

The real dilemma is that the Torah does not espouse a “live and let live” culture in which we don’t have to concern ourselves with how those around us conduct their lives, and such relationships can therefore never become acceptable in Orthodox institutions and communities, but as a tiny minority of a non-Jewish country is it so obvious that we should be at the forefront of a fight to withhold the same rights to others that we so enjoy?

That said, we definitely should not be proactively supporting a movement which we know G-d detests and those Orthodox politicians that have endorsed and voted for same-gender marriage will have to answer for themselves when they get upstairs. The delicate task for the rest of us is to convey our disapproval all the while respecting the same American values and freedoms that Jews throughout history and even today in much of the world could only dream of.

Is this a joke Branower? The Torah strictly prohibits, by pain of death, same gender relations. Yes, for gentiles.

Period. End of discussion.

Regarding same-gender “marriage”, it is clearly “un-Jewish” to support this perversion because the Torah which is the so-to-speak “bible” of the Jewish people very clearly not only forbids same-gender “marriage” but also calls it an abomination.

Deep Thinker’s point about “Histakel Bioraysa uvara alma” is IMHO an excellent one as well. The Torah is not a theoretical moral code that can be debated or outdated, CH”V. As it is the blueprint of the world, so to speak, it is downright foolish to so brazenly violate that which the Torah not only forbids but calls outright an abomination.

Hashem Yishmor.

Consider a German politicians 70 years ago who wishes to be a righteous goy – could he go along with his constituents and support the holocaust, or would he feel obligated to becoming a dissident (and eventually a traitor). Should we expect our representatives to show the same courage shown by goyim who opposed the Nazis in Europe (okay, bad analogy: a frum politician who opposes abortion or gay rights doesn’t end up hanging from a meat hook – the worst is he’ll have to get an honest job rather than be in the legislature).

“CHESED LE-UMIM CHATOS!”The compassion of the gentiles is truly a sin.”