As a member of a religious tradition which strongly supports a definition of marriage as a "partnership between a man and a woman", I'm grateful that the State Board of Social Services upheld the right of faith-based agencies to continue their work without the intrusion of the government which might have imposed some other definition of marriage, thus preventing our faith community from doing the good work it does with adoptions, etc. As long as other agencies exist which admit some other definition of marriage, the freedom of others is being maintained; however, if all agencies of whatsoever sort must adhere to a definition of marriage which some of them will find unacceptable, the religious freedom of those bodies will have been infringed upon. If our public officials, especially those elected to their office, cannot understand how the imposition of a single definition of marriage, or even the establishment of a "right" for same-sex couples to adopt, on all is an unfair imposition on the free exercise of religion of some, it is perhaps time for such persons who'd undermine the first amendment to find some other employment.