
Maybe on a local level, but probably not nationally…
[Image via Joe.My.God]
So Lady Gaga Was Pretty Great at the AMAs. And Adam Lambert Was Pretty Terrible (24)
· Cory says: JANET!!! Please, please tour!!! Awesome performance… You other folks were good... »
· Qjersey says: Adam made his statement. period. He even walked through a (closet) door. There was so... »
· kendall says: Why is the controversy over the crotch-to-the-face and the gay kiss, when he actually... »
Chai Feldblum Only Accidentally Supports Polygamy (4)
· Farbo says: People should be allowed to organize there families as they see fit. As long as there is... »
Adam Lambert: Out Magazine Can Eat Shit + Die (224)
· staciegirlie says: @Romeo–I know, what’s up with the lousy sound production, camera... »
“Anti-Gay” Anglican Bishop A Gay? (14)
· Jeannie Armstrong says: Bishop Urwin confirmed my little girl in her Christian faith. Active... »
Why Won’t China Let Director Lou Ye Show His New Movie? The Bisexual Storyline, Perhaps (3)
· Rainfish says: Oh, hell…officially atheist Communist regimes also condemned Homosexuality... »
The Ridiculous Catholic Manifesto Pledging to Ignore Gay Marriage + Abortion Laws (47)
· Rainfish says: GOD Loving figment of your imagination or dangerous delusion? … you decide. Now... »
· Schteve says: I love how they say “No one should be compelled to embrace any religion against... »
PHOTOS: Rebel With a Cause (1)
· YellowRanger says: Ooh, dreamy… »
Yeah, great. I wish I could find this even remotely funny any more.
After the most recent news on that front, I'm as un-amused by this as EMB.
let's hope California steps up and leads the nation to a post-wedge-issue era…
it is quite possible that we are ready.
——————————————————–
I hope so, An Other Greek, but we can't assume anything. There's a reason why the Founders In Their Wisdom (tip o the hat to "Justice" Scalia) established the US as a representative democracy, and not a direct democracy: the People, for the most part, are idiots–easily swayed by stupid emotional arguments, religious hocuspocus, and their own base fears and prejudices (anyone for a chorus of "bitter people clinging to religion and guns"?). And THOSE are the people the State of California is entrusting with deciding whether or not we are allowed to form legal unions with the people we love.
California's proposition system is unique for a reason: it rarely results in desirable outcomes, and more often results in creating the kind of I-don't-want-to-pay-taxes-but-I-want-all-the-services deficits and fiscal crises we're facing today.
However, as Mother Jones said, "Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living" — I suppose it's possible we can overcome history (all states but one that considered an anti-marriage amendment or law have passed it, including California) and actually discard the BushRoveCheney wedge politics. I'm not optimistic, especially given recent polls slightly favorable to our side, that can lead to complacency.
But I'd be totally happy to be proven wrong here.
I think another issue is getting pro-marriage voters to the booths. Anti-gay voters get pissed and make it a point to make their voices heard. Our straight allies and even gays may be for marriage equality, but simply be satisfied with a clear conscience without voting for it.