Wow, Since Conservatives began "protecting marriage," time honored institution takes plunge.

Minnesota State Rep. Steve Simon on Marriage Amendment to their constitution.

This really is one of the best articulations yet by a Democrat defending gay marriage, that should embarrass most homophobic Republicans attempting to mark their territory all over their state constitution:

Zack Wahls Defends Gay Marriage.

McCain's J.D. Hayworth Ad Skewers Republican Party too.

As much as I dislike John McCain, his ad against whack job J.D. Hayworth is a classic,. Having been in the advertising business, I think this is slick and effective. Man horse marriage wouldn't normally be an election issue.

Wedding vow Removal Should have been a Red Flag

Really, how dumb can one person be? Or, love is more than blind, it's asking to be dumped on. From Politicalwire.com:

South Carolina first lady Jenny Sanford says she made the "leap of faith" to marry husband Gov. Mark Sanford "even though the groom refused to promise to be faithful, insisting that the clause be removed from their wedding vows."

Said Mrs. Sanford: "It bothered me to some extent, but ... we were very young, we were in love. I questioned it, but I got past it ... along with other doubts that I had."

Carrie Prejean Makes me Sick. See Why.

I ran across this sick making video moment at Examiner.com of Carrie Prejean. Writer Micha J. Stone wrote:

"In a self serving and self glorifying speech Prejean wallowed in
self-pity, martyrdom, and vanity, while trying to convey an image of defiance to the secular world. 1,700 activists gathered for the Family Research Council’s Values Voter Summit where Prejean spoke.

Prejean claimed she was called by God to stand for the truth. By
"truth" Prejean must mean homophobia and bigotry.

Wisconsin Family Action: Gay Marriage Opponents and Bigots, are Going After Domestic Partner Benefits

I hope that I don’t sound mean spirited when I refer to the president of Wisconsin Family Action as a wack job, a loon, sick and a fringe element of society.

I have had the chance to interview Julaine Appling on WIBA-AM during my one year “Crossfire” stint with Upclose host Vicki McKenna. She sounded "off balance" and scary, and I told her so. Anyone this driven to "save marriage,” knowing that 50% of married couples get a divorce despite the existence of gay individuals, is nuts. They have little concern for heterosexual marriage, or changing laws making it more difficult or impossible to divorce, which is more in line with WFA extremist views. That’s my reason for suspecting, actually knowing for sure, that they have a more homophobic bigoted agenda.

During the debate and final implementation of the Wisconsin Marriage Amendment, Appling assured voters that their only intention was to protect marriage, and not affect partnership policy benefit programs. That was a lie, and the proof reared its ugly head today:

"Julaine Appling, president of Wisconsin Family Action (WFA), through their attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund, filed a petition for original action with the Wisconsin Supreme Court, asking the Court to declare the domestic partner registry Gov. Jim Doyle authored in the 2010-11 state budget unconstitutional and to issue a permanent injunction against it. The petitioners and their attorneys believe the domestic partner registry violates the Wisconsin Marriage Amendment … Appling said, “This new domestic partnership scheme is a sneaky assault on marriage from those who are determined to redefine marriage in Wisconsin.”

Remember, Appling assured voters that she was only concerned with marriage at the time. Sneaky is a word Appling freely applies to her morally bankrupt and unethical vision of society. Who else would see demons in our sons and daughters, friends and neighbors?

“This registry is an assault on the people, the state constitution, the democratic process, and the institution of marriage, which the people voted so recently and so overwhelmingly to protect,” said Appling. “Gov. Doyle and the legislators who approved the registry in the budget are obviously more concerned with advancing the agenda of a fringe activist group than representing the people who elected them.”

Ah, the old ploy of projection. Appling oddly accuses non-bigots and Constitutional protectors of the equal protection claus as “fringe.”

Appling said, “A reasonable person observing this registry would easily conclude that it mimics marriage and is a test of the marriage amendment and the express will of the people."

Only a reasonable person would see this as a sick, angry bigoted affront to the freedoms instituted in our Constitution. That’s why AMENDMENTS to the state constitutions are necessary to remove rights.

So is Appling a bigot? Here's what she said about gay people: "I think we’ve been extremely tolerant in allowing them to live wherever they choose" — Julaine Appling.

The Felon Living Next Door. Beware of the Criminal Adulterer.

This incredibly frivolous complaint caught my attention when it revealed that adultery in Wisconsin is a FELONY. No, really.

Journal Sentinel- A community activist on Friday filed two complaints against Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn and asked for a criminal investigation, all concerning an affair Flynn had with a married journalist.

In a letter, LaMonte Harris asked Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm to investigate whether Flynn committed adultery, a felony in Wisconsin.

Harris acknowledged that adultery is rarely prosecuted but said that someone in Flynn's position should not be violating any laws. "It sends a bad message," Harris said.

It's time to comb through the divorce court records, round up the felons, build a few prisons, and lock up every criminal adulterer. Think about it, they're stilling walking the streets, sitting next to you and your children in family restaurants and living next door to you ready to commit another adultery.

Republicans Don’t get that “Equal Protection” Thing, Lose Again on Gay Marriage.

With such overwhelmingly strong support from Vermont’s elected lawmakers, it’s hard to imagine why Republican Gov. Jim Douglas would use his veto power against the public will and support of gay marriage. Proving once again Republicans don’t get public sentiment or understand the constitution, that veto didn’t last long. Reuters:

Vermont lawmakers on Tuesday overrode a veto from the governor in passing a bill that would allow same-sex marriage, clearing the way for the state to become the fourth in the nation where gay marriage is legal. The Vermont House of Representatives passed the bill by a 100-49 vote after it cleared the state Senate 23-5 earlier in the day.

Vermont, which became the first state in the country to allow full civil unions for
same-sex couples in 2000, joins New England neighbors Connecticut and Massachusetts in allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry. Lawmakers in New
Hampshire and Maine are also considering bills to allow gay marriage. (They already offer same-sex couples some form of legal recognition.

Forty-three U.S. states have laws explicitly prohibiting such marriages, including 29 with constitutional amendments restricting marriage to one man and one woman.

Damn that Equal Protection part of the Constitution! Gay Marriage Protected in Iowa.

It's happened again. A state constitution, mirroring the federal Constitution, has determined that Americans have equal protection under the law. According to the NY Times:

Iowa became the first state in the Midwest to approve same-sex marriage on Friday, after the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously decided that a 1998 law limiting marriage to a man and a woman was unconstitutional. “The Iowa statute
limiting civil marriage to a union between a man and a woman violates the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution,” the justices said in a summary of their decision. “Equal protection under the Iowa Constitution is essentially a direction that all persons similarly situated should be treated alike.

But the cloud of “marriage” has obscured the attempt to remove the rights people have, including gay people, to be treated alike. That’s the bottom line and the Iowa Supreme Court pointed out that important fact:

Since territorial times, Iowa has given meaning to this constitutional provision, striking blows to slavery and segregation, and recognizing women’s rights. The court found the issue of same-sex marriage comes to it with the same importance as the landmark cases of the past.”

But should the mod mentality of the majority over rule the natural sexual inclinations of an American and allow for a “separate but equal” second class level of citizenship? They think so, and they are called once again to shred the Constitution.

Opponents of same-sex marriage criticized the ruling. “The decision made by the Iowa Supreme Court today to allow gay marriage in Iowa is disappointing on many levels," State Senator Paul McKinley, the Republican leader, said in a statement on The Des Moines Register’s Web site. "I believe marriage should only be between one man and one woman and I am confident the majority of Iowans want traditional marriage to be legally recognized in this state. Though the court has made their decision, I believe every Iowan should have a voice on this matter and that is why the Iowa Legislature should immediately act to pass a Constitutional Amendment that protects traditional marriage, keeps it as a sacredbond only between one man and one woman and gives every Iowan a chance to have their say through a vote of the people."

I’m sure slavery, segregation and not recognizing a woman’s right to vote might have had majority public support at one time, but the Constitution protected against that. Where are the strict conservative constructionist judges and justices on the issue of adding additional meaning to the original intent of the founding fathers on equal protection? Shouldn’t they oppose these changes?

Unfortunately we already know they answer to that question. Conservative authoritarians always knows what’s best.