Same-sex marriage is legal in Washington state, King County Superior Court Judge William Downing ruled today. Downing said the state's Defense of Marriage Act, which limits marriage to one man and one woman, is unconstitutional.

We asked people why they agree or disagree with the judge's decision today.

I'm not a law major, but all I hear is "the bible says it's not right." Hmmmmm... I thought there was a separation of church and state, yet it keeps sneaking in there when it's convenient. Just because a couple happens to be of the same sex, doesn't make them less human, less capable of loving and bad parents. Who are we to judge what is in people's hearts? Isn't that God's job?
— S. Forde, Everett

I agree with the good judge's decision. Same sex couples should have full and equal rights which includes full marriage rights. Seeing the love and commitment these same sex couples have for each other, to me, brings renewed excitement and appreciation to the institution of marriage.
— George Lund, Auburn

I totally agree with this ruling and I am not gay. I feel they should have the rights to be with their partner and marry that partner. I am happy for the gay community.
— Michelle White, Yelm

Outside of homophobia, it has never been explained why people see same-sex marriages as a threat to society. Isn't the divorce rate high enough in the heterosexual community to make that institution weak enough as it is? Why do they feel so threatened? If marriage is "protection of the family which includes creation of children" what about those straight couples who cannot have children?"
— Mark D. Petty, San Francisco

My partner and I have been together for 5 years in a loving and committed relationship. We had a commitment ceremony at our church in 2002; we got married in Vancouver, B.C., in 2003; and we were wed in Oregon in 2004 when they were briefly issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. We humorously say that we are the most married couple we know, yet we do not have any marriage rights in Washington state. It is time for fairness and equality to prevail over ignorance, discrimination and homophobia.
— Jesse Brix, Seattle

I entirely agree with the ruling today. As a gay man I think it's only fair. My partner and I have been together for over 4 years and we are working professionals who pay taxes, vote and everything else just like straight couples. We want the same protections and rights under the law that straight married couples currently have. Our relationship will not destroy or undervalue any other relationship, but I think it will only make it stronger.
— Matthew Montgomery, Seattle

Marriage is indeed a fundamental religious institution, intended to be between a man and a woman. It is illogical to compare interracial marriages to same-sex marriages. As mentioned in another post, civil unions grant same-sex couples the same rights as married couples. This isn't about fighting for civil rights. It's about rocking the boat, just to see if it'll tip.
— E. Yu, Shoreline

I agree. Those that disagree want to impose their own morality and so called values on the rest of us. This country gives us religious freedom and that means all religions, not just one.
— Barbara Tidwell, Seattle

First: Welcome to the 21st century Washington state. I look forward to my state (and the rest of the United States) joining your ranks. Second: Homosexuality has nothing to do with morality. It is not a choice. Just as the rest of us are heterosexual because of being born so, homosexuals are born, not "made." Who would choose to be constantly maligned and persecuted, and sometimes killed, by all those righteous, bible reading, so-called Christians who haven't one kind word to say about their fellow men who don't "do" as they say?
— Marian Krabbe, Warren, Pa.

When you think about it, aren't celebrity marriages doing more to destroy the concept of marriage? Maybe it's just me, but when Britney Spears can get married, and divorced, within the course of a weekend, that seems to set a more visible example to the populace. Celebrities should be banned from getting married - if our main focus is to restore marriage that is.
— J. Paulino, Seattle

Bravo for Washington! What opponents all seem to fall back on is the "immorality" of homosexuality. For anything to be immoral, it obviously must be a choice. (Is a black person immoral because of his/her skin color?) Nobody can define love. Nobody can quantify it. For every study that identifies homosexuality as a choice, there is one that says the opposite. The bottom line is this: We humans have very little idea how love works and how our emotional attachments to others develop. Given this ignorance, anybody who claims that being gay is immoral is basing their assertion on their faith... and that is just fine. But please know where your position comes from, and please do not try to legislate you faith into the lives of others. Gay people just want equal rights, not to legislate any kind of moral choices onto others.
— Mike Shaw, Boston

I absolutely agree with the ruling. It is a rare thing when two people find each other and fall in love. Just because they happen to be of the same sex should not make a difference to their fundamental rights. Who are we to say what is right or wrong when it occurs behind the closed door of someone's bedroom between consensual adults?
— Jody Stephens, Seattle

My 14-year-old son wants to drive, drink alcohol and vote, but our legislature had decided that he will be denied equal rights to perform those activities by defining those state-sanctioned and regulated acts in a way that prohibits him from driving, drinking alcohol or voting, although he is capable of each. The state legislature has similarly determined that the right of civil marriage is limited to a man and a woman. Equal protection under the law does not mean equal rights under the law. The decision is wrong and should be reversed on appeal.
— Tim Borchers, Mill Creek

Our family agrees with the court's thorough analysis and decision. Congratulations and Mazel Tov (in this first step) to those couples and families who've for so long deserved the same privileges and protections that opposite sex couples enjoy.
— Candace and Daniel Friedman, Seattle

This is the first time EVER that a headline has brought tears of joy to my eyes. My parter of two and half years and I called each other just minutes after seeing the headline and we cried together. For the last year we've been talking about getting married, but it always seemed like a dream. This ruling has made me so proud to be a Seattlite - I'm proud of the judge, proud to live in this country, and proud about my deeply committed, loving relationship.
— Mary Plummer, Seattle

I do not agree with the judge's decision. I believe that the institution of marriage's sole purpose is procreation. In fact, not only should gays not be allowed to marry, neither should those who have lost the ability to have children, whether through disease or medical sterilization. We Christians can't allow tax breaks for selfish, childless couples. Once married and properly reproduced, I believe a couple must adhere to the bond of marriage; adultery, philandering, or divorce must be illegal. It's all in the child's best interest, as God himself so obviously wants.
— Alan Payne, Seattle

I absolutely support the judge's ruling. Yes it is "traditional" for a marriage to be a man and a woman, but is that all marriage is about? It seems to me that no one else is thinking what marriage really means - a lifelong commitment. Marriage is a right. Who are we to judge and say you are not allow to receive the same benefits and same rights as I do because you are homosexual? We are living in the 20th century and it's about time!
— Charisma Li, Seattle

I respect and revere the opportunity that we are given to make choices; however, I strongly disagree with allowing same sex partners to be recognized as legal. I disagree with this from an economic and religious perspective. Economically, same sex marriage will lead to the downfall of our country. Especially considering the number of baby boomers retiring in the upcoming years. Without a new generation to fill the shoes of persons retiring our society will struggle economically. Spiritually I believe that God has defined marriage as the union of man and woman. The responsibility given to us by God to create life should not be take lightly. This is a gift given from God and homosexual behavior demeans this gift. I respect the rights of all individuals and believe that each person should be treated as a child of God. However, I do not believe that choices that lead to the destruction of our economy and that degrade the sacred gifts God has given us should be accepted or heralded as they are.
— Rick Mergenthaler, Everett

A lot of us are missing the point. I don't think anyone can seriously believe that the lawmakers that wrote our U.S. and state constitutions intended for homosexual people to marry. These laws and statutes were obviously meant for "traditional" man/woman relationships. Marriage itself is a fundamentally religious institution and most religions specifically denounce such behavior. It is fair and reasonable for same sex couples to want and expect the same rights as people in normal heterosexual relationships. Legal civil unions would solve this problem and protect the name and institution of marriage from what it was not intended for. Some religions have recently decided that the bible is incorrect and that being gay is OK, but just because you want it to be doesn't make it right.
— J. Goins, Seattle

I absolutely agree with the ruling. Marriage and its commitments should not be considered a "heterosexual only" right. Anything that fosters love and family is a good thing. Love and family are not limited to certain groups. All people and religions should recognize this and embrace it, not fight it. Marriage is defined as a "close union." To limit who is allowed to marry is unjust. Bravo Judge Downing!
— Michelle Larson, Lynnwood

Remember when it was against the law for interracial couples to marry? Think that was in 1867 no, it was 1967! It wasn't until 1967 when it was legal for inter-racial couples to marry - and now no one thinks twice about it and society didn't crumble into dust as predicted by the narrow-minded bigots back then. In 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the remaining interracial marriage laws nationwide. A Virginia judge had upheld that state's ban on interracial marriages, invoking God's intention to separate the races. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned his decision, declaring that: (1) the freedom to marry belongs to all Americans; (2) marriage is one of our vital personal rights and (3) the right to marry is essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by a free people. What effect does a marriage by any two people have on another couple? None. Nada. Zip. If every gay couple in America got married tomorrow, it would not have any impact on the personal lives of any straight married couples. Gays are not asking for special rights - they're asking for the same rights as anyone else.
— Gayl Curtiss, Issaquah

Who will gay marriage hurt? No one. If you find the idea of homosexual sex disgusting, that's your problem. If you are looking to the Bible for validation, stop. Your book is not gospel to all. If you're afraid a legal gay marriage will devalue your own marriage, than yours must not be a very strong marriage. Why gay marriage? WHY NOT!
— Michelle Lazarov, Renton

I do not agree with same-sex marriage. Marriage is for love, yes, but also for the protection of the family which includes creation of children. It is a legal and moral state. Homosexuality is not moral. Society cannot continue to ignore the extreme importance of morality. Morality is the cohesive bond which structures the successful purpose of an individual or society. Without this strengthening there is crumbling and chaos.
— Susan Gill, Maple Valley

I will remember this judge come voting time! The people of Washington are full and equal citizens. "Marriage" is available to all citizens. "Marriage" is a union between a man (male) and a woman (female). The bastardization of marriage by those who would have us believe that marriage should include same sex people is a sad commentary on how many heterosexual couples have raised their children. The thinking of people who support same sex marriage or are same-sex orientated already has a perversion of how to raise children. Two wrongs don't make it right! We need to support and educate people on how to have a good and healthy marriage relationship between a man and a woman.
— Bev Grace, Redmond