Or is this a sad attempt to rally the base, prepping for November?
I'd like to be with the legal scholar crowd on this issue and push it aside as a state's rights issue or a individual-issue, but I can't.
If it is constitutional to define wide-spread, multicultural-encompassing, historic sins as crimes, then it is certainly constitutional to define historic values as they are.
I don't really care if this thing goes through because it probably won't, not in the next year at least. But I'm sick of the idiots claiming they have a right to be legally recognized as a married couple, when they are by definition, not. It's akin to saying, I have a right to be recognized as this guy's sister. Just because I'm not a sibling woman, doesn't mean you have to impose your beliefs on me, you religous Nazi zealout.
What John and Joe do in front of their own priest is their business, but the government has a right to not recognize it.
Some Judges don't get that