Equality for all. Doesn't mean equality for some. It means equality for all.

Our government, to be fair and establish justice for all, absolutely must see every human as being equally protected, to allow the citizens to freely pursue their happiness, and live in liberty, no matter their lifestyle.

... are as bad if not worse than others. Sad but true.

Maine and Washington look like good bets to survive ballot measures, with Maryland and Minnesota a bit less likely. However, North Carolina still resides in my "not a chance in hell" column. I hope I'm wrong but I have seen nothing to suggest otherwise as of yet.

That gives me hope.

at least it looks as if the the "anti gay marriage" amendment will not win. it could be a few more years before the "pro marriage rights for every person regardless of sexual identity" law goes through. but at least, if enough people vote, we won't be going backward. i would so hate that!

When people get into the voting booth, and are free to express their bigotries anonymously, the tyranny of the majority has free reign.

Slavery wouldn't have ended in the US had it been put to a majority vote. Jim Crow laws wouldn't have ended had they been put to a majority vote. Miscegenation laws wouldn't have ended had they been put to a majority vote.

too bad we have such a right wing reactionary politicized SC. if we didn't, a case might make it that far and get the constitutional decision it deserves.
i hate that this issue still comes before a vote.

k&r

Our constitution was written 200+ years ago by white male land-owners who were certainly not omniscient. The fact that they counted some as only 3/5 of a person and didn't mention others at all (women? what are women?) should make that abundantly clear. It's time for amending, or maybe even a re-write in my view.

In contrast, check out the Soviet's constitution from 1977 -

Article 34. Citizens of the USSR are equal before the law, without
distinction of origin, social or property status, race or nationality, sex,
education, language, attitude to religion, type and nature of occupation,
domicile, or other status.
The equal rights of citizens of the USSR are guaranteed in all fields of
economic, political, social, and cultural life.

Article 35. Women and men have equal rights in the USSR.
Exercise of these rights is ensured by according women equal access with
men to education and vocational and professional training, equal opportunities
in employment, remuneration, and promotion, and in social and political, and
cultural activity, and by special labour and health protection measures for
women; by providing conditions enabling mothers to work; by legal protection,
and material and moral support for mothers and children, including paid leaves
and other benefits for expectant mothers and mothers, and gradual reduction of
working time for mothers with small children.

Too bad our people aren't educated or curious enough to discover eye openers like this.

Thanks for posting

Some of my friends in VT and NH are pretty much non-reconstructed hillbillies, and were pretty ambivalent - but we came up with some common ground around the campfire.

It ain't so much about the ones bein' married, as it is about their families. Kids don't deserve the short end of the stick 'cuz the law made one of their parents illegitimate. Either Mom can go to parent/teacher conference, either Dad can sign report cards. Hospitals don't get to throw parents, children, or spouses out because some fool does'nt approve of a relationship. Parental and grandparent's rights don't get torched 'cuz a couple breaks up. And we know our neighbors - and don't care to have 'em badmouthed by some TV sinburner.

i just don't get how anyone spins it any other way. EVERYONE is entitled to the same civil rights as EVERYONE else. it's simple.

but labeling it a "right" makes it seem like something worth doing. It's a scam. Why not make it more expensive to get into than out of?

It's a sexist institution that should be banished to the rubbish bin anon!