Gay Marriage to Alfred: Your Thoughts

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1109/Frank_Dont_Ask_repeal_coming_next_year.html

Are same-sex couples better parents?

read it here, confused now tbh

http://www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=28029

well, the bill passed in 2010 is for the next year, i.e. 2011. Gov't doesn't exactly work on a pay-as-you-go scheme.

wait what? not from ur country btw jus so u kno

like getting snarky abt me not being 100% on how ur govt works seems pretty silly but then mayb that is how u roll

that's not really snarky though

But as an amendment, it could be made effective whenever they choose, Shakey, no?

not trying to be snarky! sorry.

Appropriations/funding bills are passed for each fiscal year, not on a week-by-week or month-by-month basis. After all, the gov't only collects income taxes once a year. So in 2009 congress approves all the funding for 2010, in 2010 they approve all the funding for 2011, etc. This is kinda a standard budgeting practice for governments, isn't it? And since the DADT repeal is being included in an appropriations bill that will pass next year, that means it will go into effect in 2011. But the bill will have passed and the law will have been repealed in 2010. Make sense?

x-post

But as an amendment, it could be made effective whenever they choose, Shakey, no?

well this is kinda true but what else would they amend it to? The defense budget is a bill that is guaranteed passage, no one's going to filibuster or vote it down based on this one amendment. Whereas if they amended it to some other random bill it might be more difficult to get through.

yeah i can see how in a large country like the US this would be a cumbersome move that would take up to a year to implement but living in a country with 4 million ppl I tend not to think of things like this, sorry for interpreting snark and thereby forcing this thread into digressions abt fiscal years :-/

If they do pass it as an amendment, they probably won't tie it to any appropriations schedule but set out a timetable to amend the Title 10 of the US Code.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2009/12/no-doma-repeal-attempt-in-2010-and.html

That's good news. If you don't care about gay marriage. Which you don't.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/01/prop-8-backers-seek-to-block-federal-trial-broadcast.html

"Many supporters of Proposition 8 who are being dragged into this case are fearful about being questioned about their personal, political and religious beliefs on the stand and having that televised," Pugno said.

I kinda have a hard time generating sympathy for these folks..

fuck 'em

agreed

Are they going to call that poor lady who runs El Coyote as a witness?

fuck 'em

― larry craig memorial gloryhole (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, January 8, 2010 4:45 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

wonderful piece by ted olson in newsweek

I wonder if Ted Olson has a gay family member. Hes so passionate about it.

I also dont understand how this thing going on now is a 'trial'. Is some couple suing the state civilly for discrimination?

Olson's a fascinating guy. For all his wingnut roots he gives the impression of a guy who's spent a lifetime carving out principles only to have them challenged recently, and he's sensitive enough to find a connection between "classic" conservatism and the support of gay marrriage.

this might be old news but divorce rates lower in states that don't ban gay marriage

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/divorce-rates-appear-higher-in-states.html

Is some couple suing the state civilly for discrimination?

yes gay couples are suing the state for violating their civil rights under the Constitution - no matter what happens this is the case that will go to the Supreme Court

Can't wait for embittered Scalia dissent.

maybe he'll get so bent-out-of-shape he'll just, you know, die already.

"So am I to understand that homosexualists, you know, what to stick penile objects yay big into their anuses? They're not the only ones who'll be asking for protection."

http://blogs.e-rockford.com/applesauce/files/2009/10/scalia.jpg

I imagine he finds gays about as confusing as non-Christians (cf. his whole "the cross is not a religious symbol" argument)

"the penis goes WHERE?"

^^^^ this would be a question to a lesbian couple

btw this is a good book.

Nino Scalia can probably imagine lots of positions for lesbians.

Ha ha, I read the most apopleptic review of that book not long ago.

the title's the worst part.

My post is a little misleading. The reviewer basically said that she outed him as a highly partisan judge in very bad faith.

i think people who read that book and don't think scalia is a highly partisan judge are only fooling themselves

Yeah, um, if anyone's been hoodwinked it's readers. I mean, Scalia doesn't equivocate or "clarify" public statements. He doesn't give a damn.

http://cbs2.com/local/cindy.mccain.gay.2.1439011.html

cindy.mccain.gay

;)

Defection at the fringes ain't a trend. People currently under 40 were overwhelmingly against 8; people currently over 60 were overwhlemingly against.

The difference was 300,000 votes. Next year a whole bunch of under 40s will be old enough to vote for the first time, and a whole bunch of over 60s will be dead. You do the math.

― Passenger 57 (rogermexico.), Monday, November 17, 2008

The math is gettin' done: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/03/50-of-californians-now-support-gay-marriage-poll-finds.html

yeah this is gonna get overturned

"Say I Do" is a great slogan btw

some friends are getting married in dc this weekend <3

from Laura Bush's memoir:

"In 2004 the social question that animated the campaign was gay marriage. Before the election season had unfolded, I had talked to George about not making gay marriage a significant issue. We have, I reminded him, a number of close friends who are gay or whose children are gay. But at that moment I could never have imagined what path this issue would take and where it would lead."

We have, I reminded him, a number of close friends who are gay

lindsey graham?

Charlie Crist.

Worrying about hurting people is so like a woman. GWB had his eyes on the REAL prize: the power to fuck over everyone you don't like.

whereas Bill Clinton had his eyes on a different prize: the power to fuck everyone

Obama, thankfully, has his eyes on what really counts: scaring the shit out of white people.

YES