In which I beat a dead horse.

In California, voters will cast a ballot on Question 8, deciding whether to amend the state's constitution to forbid marriage between same-sex couples.

I'm not sure what more can be said on this topic, but I'll try.

What is wrong with people?

There is no principled basis for forbidding same sex marriage. None, nada, zip, zero. I have seen many people try and none have come close. To be sure, there may be scads of reasons for any given individual to oppose it. There may be lots of perfectly sound theological reasons for a church to refuse to perform such ceremonies. But there is no intellectual, moral, ethical, philosophical, legal, or rational basis to forbid the state from granting any two consenting adults the right to marry one another. Sorry. No. We don't work that way.

But some people in California felt that the constitution needed to be amended to actually take rights away from a disfavored minority. Do you know why the favorite tactic of gay-bashers is the constitutional amendment? It's because they know that time is against them. Constitutional amendments are much harder to undo than regular laws. By amending the constitution, de jure discrimination will remain the law of the land long after it ceases to garner even a plurality of public support.

The single greatest indicator of someone's position on same-sex marriage is... age. (Well, I suppose sexual orientation might be a bigger one, but you know what I mean). The younger you are, the less you care whether two adults you don't know get married. The homophobes and haters read the demographic writing on the wall, and know that every year that goes by, more of them are dead, to be replaced by people who simply don't care about that issue.

So they seek to amend the constitution so that their cold, dead, homophobic, hateful hands can reach out from beyond the grave to keep people they don't know from getting married.

Fuckers.