California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

That's why I was talking about a civil union. Why is that not an acceptable option?

And I was talking about humans having a need for such things as power of attorney , etc.

The idiotic gay marriage insult kicks these deserving individuals to the curb.

Don't throw your straw men at me, CI. I am not other christians. - simply a voice of reason.

Gosh! If you had argued this case before the S.C. they might have made a different decision.

No answer I see for the question about Japan.

Rachel Maddow Show Marriage Equality California
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26315908/#52347008

You seem to live by the word of images of pipsqueaks Rex.

Is it exciting watching lesbians on TV? Is she a lesbian in order to draw attention to herself? Or is she daring some man to take her on and give her the cure? His clincher being "how do you know you don't like it if you haven't tried it?" Which is an intellectual argument as well as a sensual one and as such wouldn't, or shouldn't, be lost on a Rhodes scholar. Unless she replies, "I hate men".

Where does that leave you old chap?

It's always going to be good PR to be the first outed lesbian on TV. It's the easy way to double the ratings. It's all well worn cliches after that. Most of them being present on these threads.

Nothing new. Hence you just like TV images telling you what you want them to tell you. Which is catechismic really. Repetitive mantras reassuring you. Verbal caresses.

Try watching stuff that challenges your opinions. Give it a break and see if it is as stupid as you think.

You'll never be a songwriter worthy of the name unless you do.

I like the idea of using a chopstick for same sex relationships, but trying to determine which side is the man or woman is kind of foolish.

I did not like the question, when you were asked if you were the husband or wife but I think you explained yourself well. it is hard to change a belief.

You are being silly spendius, you know very well that he listens to opposing points of views and responds to them as well.

Isn't it convenient to use Ignore to avoid answering the question about Japan and nobody noticing.

I tried to use chopsticks once. Almost put my eye out. but the worst part of this was that my wife took my bb gun away from me.

That's the first time I heard of a chopstick being used for self-mutilation! LOL

Asians have been using chopsticks for centuries without incident. You must be the very first, and belong on Ripley's.

Youve got to remember CI. I am Italian and we dident have enough coordination to jack a shell into a rifle during the second world war without dropping the gun. Its racial trait.

Rex--what is the form of the vows taken at a same-sex "wedding" in California?

What does the office boy or girl ask the happy couple to sign up for?

Gay Pride Protesters Get Shut Down

There are many words that can express the same sentiment. Life-long companions, spouse and spouse, helpmates, partnership, households and families... Husband and husband, or wife and wife, the label should not really add or detract from what the occasion means.

The idea, is to understand equality as the same bond and commitment without bias, judgment and hypocrisy.

No Rex. I didn't ask for that balderdash which means anything anybody finds it convenient to mean.

What words do Californian bureaucrats use in a same sex "wedding" ceremony and how do they compare with those used in a marriage ceremony in a Catholic church. The latter I can quote exactly.

If the vows made in the former mean nothing other than a temporary sentiment and the vows made in a Catholic church mean everything how can you possibly equate the two under the one label.

If the vows (oaths) made by military personnel don't set those making them apart from those who have not made them then we might all claim to be in the military in the same way you are claiming that being "married" does not require the lifetime commitment the Catholic Church demands to remain a member. There is nothing demanded in your formulations.

The difference is fundamental. To corral the two under the same label is a sophistry and an attack on language which is surprising in a creative literary artist. You wouldn't have a language to work with if its words can mean opposite things.

if a civil rights violation is continually perpetrated on a population, it is often overridden by courts.
For example, in the South of the past mid century, the large majority of whites were contented to keep the racist policies in law. They voted them in and abided by them. So the voters CHOSE to remain a bigoted racist society. The Congress (and later, the USSC) gradually made the practice of "separate but equal" a crime.

California will, I believe, have to arrive at the same spot.