The only consolation is the eventual death of those who voted for it. Even among the superstitious, the support for this sort of pigfuckery is declining.
Every amendment in our state constitution affirms a right, except one. I'm still mad about it, too. Among other things, the official release from the state board was blatantly untrue in what the amendment would and would not do.
I'm really hoping that Obama's affirmation is another step toward repealing DOMA -- despite some legislators' efforts -- and from there, the state dominoes begin to fall (despite bigoted voters in thirty-two freakin' states past efforts.)
What I'd really like to see is a SCOTUS ruling against putting civil rights to a vote, if such a thing would be feasible/plausible.
I am always amazed when I read that the bible makes it clear that marriage is between one man and one woman, when in fact the bible has NUMEROUS cases of polygamy, incest, and sanctioned adultery...
It doesn't count when you're marrying a SLAVE, and in the Bible, all women are slaves. But once women are considered people, you're only allowed one of them.
(I suspect it was a huge concession for early-20th-century Christians to allow more than one real-person participant in a Marriage at all, and so they figured insisting that the second be a woman was a fair tradeoff.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 06:46 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 07:29 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 11:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 07:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-10 03:42 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 07:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 09:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 09:55 pm (UTC)Thanks.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 10:02 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 11:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 11:25 pm (UTC)What I'd really like to see is a SCOTUS ruling against putting civil rights to a vote, if such a thing would be feasible/plausible.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-10 12:57 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-10 01:23 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 10:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-10 12:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-10 12:58 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-10 03:27 am (UTC)(I suspect it was a huge concession for early-20th-century Christians to allow more than one real-person participant in a Marriage at all, and so they figured insisting that the second be a woman was a fair tradeoff.)
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-10 12:55 am (UTC)