no getting back

[summerskin]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/us/politics/06prop.html

Mr. Shrum claiming that people got "comfortable with the idea" says a lot about the underlying cultural ideas in the country. Why would people need to get used to the idea of gay marriage? You can only claim this if you're talking about heteronormative people, and implying those are your target audience anyway.

It was obvious on Wednesday that the ruling would be appealed (the next day no less) and reach the Supreme Court. It's a process turning into an avalanche.

This issue needs to be on the agenda. Even if it's not being openly discussed, it's there. Everyone can see it, and it would be so stupid for anyone to pretend it wasn't, on either side. In the end, I don't know if the elections are going to make a real difference in the immediate future. Sure, there will be rallying and a lot of effort made, but it also depends what happens in the Supreme Court.

Personally, I think if everyone would just get their heads out of their arses, this would all go a lot smoother. How many people do you think there are in California (it's California we're talking about here!) who are unwilling to support gay marriage, are so closeted they can't see the closet door anymore, or are just plain scared to put their foot down when in fact they care about the issue? I'd say more than anyone reading this would think.

Ms. Whitman: OK, let me get this straight (hahaha no). You don't support gay marriage. You actively oppose it. But you are in favour of people of the same gender being in domestic partnerships. See, people who oppose gay marriage have a general issue with the gay part (for whatever reason). The fact that what you are saying is in fact that gay partnerships are OK as long as there is no official document attached to it cannot stop baffling me right now. Am I just not getting this very particular brand of logic? Or is it just that I see things as more black and white than that?