Well tomorrow the gay marriage issue comes to the fore again, with California beginning to marry gay men and women. Interestingly, the marriages may not ultimately count if the Californian people pass the constitutional amendment in November banning them. Polls have consistently shown Californians to be opposed to gay marriage. It's unclear whether that law would nullify people already married, though.

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/15/MNQC118UG3.DTL&tsp=1

 

Both presidential candidates are opposed to gay marriage. For McCain that's obvious, but with Obama it's a bit thinner line to straddle. But ultimately this is, like video game censorship, one of those areas where Democrats find there to be sufficient room to straddle the line in order to gain "crossover" appeal in the red states. That's because many Democrats who are part of religious minorities (blacks and hispanics) are opposed to gay marriage on religious grounds, and that robs the liberal base of some of his power in this area.

 

Which, of course, is another reason why Democrats like to focus on the Economy.

Obama would probably let it happen, though, if Congress tried. That's the difference I suppose, one of willpower.

But I have a cousin in California! This means his marriage will somehow be destroyed, as conservatives have failed to adequately defend it.

Why are we even still talking about such things in the year 2008?

Why also does this only come up during presidential election years?

</rhetorical questions>

Why are we even still talking about such things in the year 2008?

Why also does this only come up during presidential election years?

</rhetorical questions>

 

 

Because these idiots keep bringing it up.

But I have a cousin in California! This means his marriage will somehow be destroyed, as conservatives have failed to adequately defend it.

 

I read the bolded part as "magically", which is a quality I attribute to any fanciful effects whose mechanisms can't be pinned down.

please save us from the moral decadence of people like these:

 

 

You can tell they're out to destroy American, just by looking at them.

But I have a cousin in California! This means his marriage will somehow be destroyed, as conservatives have failed to adequately defend it.

 

What I'm trying to figure out is if it's a one-to-one destruction method, or if the damage is spread out amongst all marriages. So if one gay couple gets married, does that destroy one hetero marriage, or does it destroy all hetero marriages just a little bit?

 

You can tell they're out to destroy American, just by looking at them.

 

Just one of many attributes we can infer from merely looking at people. Just this morning I walked into a store full of women that wanted me. I could tell just by looking at them.