Many Texans of all political affiliations will vote Tuesday on amending the Texas Constitution on gay marriage. As disputes among the church rapidly risde during this time of indecision, political tension naturally rises amid these disagreements.

Tuesday, Texans will vote on Proposition 2, a state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman and touches on other issues relating to homosexuality and marriage.

Voters must realize that whatever tensions arise, may come out of differing opinions about how social reform should be confronted, not necessarily differences in values.

The proposed constitutional amendment denies the recognition of civil unions and denies recognition to gay married couples, regardless of what state in which they were married.

A similar law, the Defense of Marriage Act, was passed by the Texas Legislature in May of 2003 and denies homosexuals marriage and civil union rights.

The Defense of Marriage Act and the latest constitutional amendment brought up for Texans, including Christians, the issue of how they should react to such regulations and political changes.

During this unsure time, a Texan may, as a reflex, judge another person by the stance he or she takes on the issue of gay marriage. You might ask, “How can you vote in favor of civil unions or even gay marriages and still claim Christianity?” Another might ask, “How can you take away someone’s right to decide how they want to live his or her life?”

Just because someone has an opposing opinion on a major issue like gay marriage, doesn’t mean he or she doesn’t necessarily think the issues are any less wrong or any more right. They simply take a different approach to how these issues should be confronted.

For example, you might see homosexuality as an issue that needs to be dealt with politically-using laws and constitutional amendments. However, you might equally see the wrong in homosexuality, but decide that a person should make his or her own choice on the matter.

We are going to disagree on major issues. But often, these disagreements among parties are not issues of morality, rather they are disagreements about the method by which these issues should be handled.

Before judgment is cast upon someone else about the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality, one should be reminded that we aren’t going to unanimously agree on how social reform should take place.

As Thomas Jefferson said in his first inaugural address: “Every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle.”