On a more serious note, I think for a large segment of our population abstaining is a step towards equal rights. It's not a no vote, but it's not a yes vote either. Progress takes small steps sometimes.

No Leo, your abstaintion was an honorable choice ... ya know, for the likes of you. :p


I'm pissed at the people who will take positive action to deny others their civil rights, not those who do nothing.


(Though, in California, I'm pissed at our supporters who did not bother to vote ... btw, that's YOU belleh5, as well as your new boyfriend, keith SuPeR K!)

I'm somewhat pissed at the latter. Though my marriage rights aren't in question, I'm raising kids in this world and I want it to be one of equality. To be at the polls and not stand up for that kinda sucks. But, on a reasonable level, I realize that we just aren't there yet. A non vote is the next best thing to a no vote, unfortunately.

Not sure I appreciate the "douchebag" comparison. I'll explain my vote - or lack there of.

In terms of my religious views....those would say to vote for such a proposition. However, my religious views should not be imposed on others (when there's no harm involved to others....which is why I don't view my abortion views as problematic, but I won't go into that, as that isn't the subject at hand). So I chose not to vote on it. I would have a crisis of conscience voting either way.

This I can totally understand. I'm glad you chose to abstain.

Under your rationale, I don't view your abortion views as problematic either, though I don't share them. However, in the civil arena, I think that when the question is should something be prohibited, the reasoned conclusion that something is not harmful to others requires a "no" answer.

By the way, I don't think the "No on 8" folks made the truly conservative case for a no vote that they could have. They framed it mostly as a question of personal rights, which it was. However, they should have emphasized the increase in social stability and family centeredness that--supposedly--comes with marriage as we understand it.

Imposing one's personal religious views on others is a douchebag thing to do. I didn't call you a douchebag, I called the proponents of 102 douchebags. Which, IMO, they are.

Again, IMO, religions have some douchebag views. The bible also promotes slavery, says that people with dark skin are cursed, etc. Once upon a time, it was used to promote oppression of black people. It's no longer kosher to do so, so those parts are overlooked. It's still ok to oppress gays, so the anti-gay parts of the bible are waved around. In fifty years, they'll be glossed over as well.

That being said, I know a few people who manage to be religious while taking what they find useful from their book of choice and leaving the rest. I respect that you don't want to inflict your views on others, but that doesn't mean I don't think those views archaic and oppressive.

Also, douchebag is my new favorite word.

OK, now I get it.

Making a college education affordable to ever kid in this country is one of Obama's goals for his administration right?

Well guess what?

It turns out that dems do better at the polls with college educated folks regardless of race or religion. So if everyone has a college education.......

Obama is one sneaky SOB. He was never content with just the presidency, he wants to ruin the entire republican party forever.

Bush, McCain, and current party leadership already beat him to it.

Don't forget Palin.