[CA News] And I asked her for some happy news...

[roseembolism]

And she said...


CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT LEGALIZES SAME-SEX MARRIAGE! 


Well, it looks like California at least, is a bit closer to civilized Europe than the rest of America. And oh boy, the conservative talk radio hosts must be frothing at their mouths.  FROTHING I say!

Comments

[mithriltabby]

Next, petitions will be circulating to put something on the November ballot to amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage. If the same-sex-marriage activists are smart, they’ll circulate one saying that marriage is a sacrament that is left to churches to define and that the state only recognizes gender-blind civil unions. The M-word triggers a knee-jerk response with many people, and removing it from play would be a very effective move.

[devonapple.livejournal.com]

loupyone has a similar suggestion here. In an entry titled "Marriage as Pork."

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

It's an interesting idea, but well, I don't think it will fly, because the pro gay marriage people have just as much invested emotionally as the religious right does.

Marriage has always been a legal state, even more than it's been a religious ritual. Aside from the major benefits that marriage gives on the federal level, it really is a matter of being seen as equal standing in the eyes of the government.

Also, frankly, simply liking people of the same sex does not render one immune to the massive cultural, emotional and spiritual weight that marriage has.When someone wants to marry their partner, they don't want to do it just for the legal benefits; it's a way of making a commitment to their partner in the eyes of society. That aspect won't go away even if the legal benefits for marriage change, or if the government disassociates itself completely from the element of marriage.

So sadly, this will continue until one side has enough support to completely vanquish the other.

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

Definitely there will be a "one-man-one-woman" constitutional amendment on the state ballot this fall, and it is a fact that the previous law passed handily. That should give the conservatives some comfort.

BUT, that was eight years, and there has been some progress on accepting gays in the meantime. Also, it was an off year when that law passed, and those tend to be more conservative.

This year, with the Right disorganized and demoralized, AND with a hot Democratic candidate, AND six months to prepare, I'm cautiously optimistic that the amendment wouldn't pass. I'll need to look at some polling data to be sure, but that's my gut feeling.

But I'm not going to rest easy. For my part, as soon as an "anti-amendment" group starts up, I'm going to be volunteering my time.

[mithriltabby]

A properly cynical approach would be to get hot lesbian couples to make out in public while wearing low-cut wedding gowns. If that had been the image of gay marriage, there would’ve been a federal amendment in support of it by now.

BUNK

[racerxmachina.livejournal.com]

Well, that image dicks the prospect of ME getting any work done today....

*off to the Google Image Search*

Re: BUNK

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

You know, slothman, I think you may have something there. Maybe organize highly publicized kiss-ins and show the video on youtube, youporn, Fark, etc..

You could get Anne Heche to be the spokesperson. I hear she's not busy these days...or maybe that's not a good idea.