Prop 8 is to get a ruling today

[KSUViolet06]

The level of hysteria among the evangelical peeps on my FB feed is at an all time high.

OMG TEH GAYS IS TAKING OVER TEH UNIVERSE. EVERYBODY RUNNNN!!!!TEH WORLD IZ ENDING!

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by KSUViolet06

The level of hysteria among the evangelical peeps on my FB feed is at an all time high.

OMG TEH GAYS IS TAKING OVER TEH UNIVERSE. EVERYBODY RUNNNN!!!!TEH WORLD IZ ENDING!

BRB GONNA GO MARRY MAH GAY TURTLE


This is why I don't have those people on my friends list anymore.

[DaemonSeid]

[PiKA2001]

I always thought the benefit of being gay was the fact that you COULDN'T get stuck in a shitty marriage?

“My wife and I were happy for twenty years. Then we met.”
-Rodney Dangerfield

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

I always thought the benefit of being gay was the fact that you COULDN'T get stuck in a shitty marriage?

“My wife and I were happy for twenty years. Then we met.”
-Rodney Dangerfield

Well first you must prove that it is a fact!

[agzg]

This is just me, and drole you can correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the "western" open relationship different than polygamy in the fact that for many couples/groups in polyamorous relationships is that it's not, in fact, permanent? It may be long term, but the implication of marriage is that it's permanent (no matter how easily any given couple can get a divorce).

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by agzg

This is just me, and drole you can correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the "western" open relationship different than polygamy in the fact that for many couples/groups in polyamorous relationships is that it's not, in fact, permanent? It may be long term, but the implication of marriage is that it's permanent (no matter how easily any given couple can get a divorce).

I know poly relationships that have lasted just as long as a typical marriage. Or ones that include more than one marriage within the group (A quad of two couples for example.) But American relationships in particular are not as marriage focused as they used to be, even if the long term relationships are considered permanent. And being in a non-publicly accepted relationship could also explain why some don't last as long as they otherwise could.

It depends on the relationship and the rules involved. Some have just one long term relationship with multiple more transient ones, some are very stable/long term and involve raising kids through adulthood.

I'd argue that though marriage implies a permanent commitment it's the commitment part that's the important part.

[DaemonSeid]

hey Drole...do you feel like being my 2nd wife? I can afford it.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

hey Drole...do you feel like being my 2nd wife? I can afford it.

Sorry no, I have needs.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Sorry no, I have needs.

You may say no now...but some day...

[Drolefille]

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/m...riagebyage.png
for full size.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/m...riagebyage.png
for full size.

Rhode Island and New York don't have gay marriage mostly because of specific situations in their legislatures, with people who oppose gay marriage holding either significant leadership positions in the Democratic caucus (for RI) or balance of Power (NY Senate).

Iowa does have gay marriage because the State Supreme Court ruled that it had to and unlike California, getting something like that overturned at the ballot box is incredibly difficult. A state constitutional amendment would be needed which *either* means it has to pass the state legislatures (both houses individually) in two consecutive sessions and then pass at the ballot box *or* through a state constitutional convention (which gets voted on every ten years, but could lead to things completely unrelated to gay marriage that no one can predict)

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by naraht

Rhode Island and New York don't have gay marriage mostly because of specific situations in their legislatures, with people who oppose gay marriage holding either significant leadership positions in the Democratic caucus (for RI) or balance of Power (NY Senate).

Iowa does have gay marriage because the State Supreme Court ruled that it had to and unlike California, getting something like that overturned at the ballot box is incredibly difficult. A state constitutional amendment would be needed which *either* means it has to pass the state legislatures (both houses individually) in two consecutive sessions and then pass at the ballot box *or* through a state constitutional convention (which gets voted on every ten years, but could lead to things completely unrelated to gay marriage that no one can predict)

Yes but the far more important part to me is that the anti-gay marriage people are dying off

[pshsx1]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Yes but the far more important part to me is that the anti-gay marriage people are dying off

The deep South isn't, though...

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by pshsx1

The deep South isn't, though...

Yeah well, one step at a time.

Also the AFA is wanting Judge Walker impeached. Because he's gay and dared to rule on this issue. Source