But states' rights don't exist here: If gay marriage is recognized in Massachussets, it'll be recongized in Mississippi because of Full Faith and Credit. So, Mississippians will go to Massachussets to get married and come back home.

But it is far easier to motivate people AGAINST something than for it.

When a true radical has a chance of being elected, turnout soars. (see David Duke)

You write: one could argue that official recognition of the seriousness of love is a rather dubious use of the legal power of the state.

True enough, but that really is the cultural meaning of marriage, no? Not to tread on fuzzy or inconclusive ground or anything. . .

My basic sense is that once fence-sitting straight people realize that the FMA folks want to exclude friends, relatives, co-workers, fellow church members, neighbors, etc. from marriage or anything like it, the whole issue will become one of whether or not it is fair to those people whom they already know and love. Or at least I hope so.

I think "we're in love" is the current meaning of marriage, for all intents and purposes. But if that's all it ever was, we'd probably not have come up with the institution to begin with. It originally had religious significance, plus the whole "raising kids" thing. Gay marriage obviously doesn't fit that mold--although neither does a sizable chunk of hetero marriages.

"I think "we're in love" is the current meaning of marriage, for all intents and purposes. But if that's all it ever was, we'd probably not have come up with the institution to begin with. It originally had religious significance, plus the whole "raising kids" thing. Gay marriage obviously doesn't fit that mold--although neither does a sizable chunk of hetero marriages."

*************************************************

If you mean marriage in a Judaeo-Christian respect has 'religious significance', sure. However, the marriage compact goes back far earlier to when it was not so significantly tied to religion or the "raising of children".

Just what's the big deal?? So what. Let gay folks get married. Everyone's always saying gay people are promiscuous. Now when they want to legitimize their relaitonships for legal and emotional reasons... everyone runs around putting the snafu on that too. Boils down to homophobia. Nothing more nothing less. Christ there's no satisfying some people.

Thank God I'm from Massachusetts!

(Just pointing out that sometimes '-phobia' ain't exactly accurate, and should be scare-quoted for most of us who aren't 100% 'for'.)

---

Also, it's 38 states: you need 3/4, and the rounding is up.

Plus this is the sort of thing that might lead to the states calling a constitutional convention, something I dare say that Congress would rather not see...