pg. 12 - When asked to identify the evidence at trial that supported this contention (responsible procreation is really at the heart of society’s interest in regulating marriage), proponents’ counsel replied, “you don’t have to have evidence of this point.”
I mean I haven't been to law school or anything but I think you kinda do.
pg. 13 - Proponents’ procreation argument, distilled to its essence, is as follows: the state has an interest in encouraging sexual activity between people of the opposite sex to occur in stable marriages because such sexual activity may lead to pregnancy and children, and the state has an interest in encouraging parents to raise children in stable households.
Since they can't have kids accidentally, it would seem to me that it is more likely that kids of same sex couples are more likely to be in a stable home because their creation would be, by nature, premeditated.
Some Canadian already figured out how two women can have a baby. And it's still premeditated.
pg. 24 - Tam identified “the internet” as the source of information connecting same-sex marriage to polygamy and incest.
I guess he didn't bother to google Mormons while he was at it. Mormons def. can't be linked to polygamy. It's not at all ironic that Mormons gave money to fight an institution that will lead to polygamy. Anything leading to the acceptance of polygamy is not in their best interest. In fact, it's in their worst interest. Boooo. Mormons hate polygamy. Boooooo.
pg. 29 - Chauncey is a professor of history and American studies at Yale University
Yayyyyyy Chauncey
pg. 38 - The record does not reveal the reason behind proponents’ failure to call their expert witnesses.
Because they were full of shit. Easy enough. Put that on record.
pg. 45 - “Q: Is it your view that that man who has married one wife, and then another wife, and then another wife, and then another wife, and then another wife, and now has five wives, and they are all his wives at the same time, that that marriage is consistent with your rule of two? * * * A: I concur with Bronislaw Malinowski, and others, who say that that is consistent with the two rule of marriage.”
What the hell kind of math is that?
pg. 47 - Blankenhorn’s third opinion is that recognizing same-sex marriage will lead to the deinstitutionalization of marriage.
Yeah. Just like electing Obama deinstitutionalized racism
pg. 98 - Well-known stereotypes about gay men and lesbians include a belief that gays and lesbians are affluent, self-absorbed and incapable of forming long-term intimate relationships. Other stereotypes imagine gay men and lesbians as disease vectors or as child molesters who recruit young children into homosexuality. No evidence supports these stereotypes.
But I wanna be affluent and self-absorbed : - (
pg. 117 - California has created two separate and parallel institutions to provide couples with essentially the same rights and obligations.
Ooooh. Essentially. This is what essentially gets you.
In the beginning, (see what I did there) LDS raised all this money to hate on homos because the Head Mormons in Charge were like God contacted us. Personally. And was like cut that gay shit out. You HAVE to give these organizations your money because this is one of those times that our religion mandates you support something. And if you don't give a shit ton of money, we kickin' yo ass out.
God's To-Do Lost before Prop 8
God's To-Do List after. This is the one he sent to The Head Mormons in Charge
You see, stopping gay marriage became his TOP priority. Stopping gay marriage made God sleepy!
*Here's a link to the whole shabang
And here's a link to topical humor!
