Politicians react to same-sex marriage rulings

EVERYBODY has something to say about today’s U.S. Supreme Court rulings on same-sex marriage. Here’s the latest from your Bay Area elected officials.

From U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.:

“As author of the bill to repeal the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, I am thrilled by today’s Supreme Court decision.

“Today’s ruling clearly establishes that the 14 senators who opposed DOMA in 1996 were correct. It also states that one class of legally married individuals cannot be denied rights under federal law accorded to all other married couples. Doing so denies ‘equal protection’ under the Constitution. This is an important and significant decision.

“Because of inequities in the administration of more than 1,100 federal laws affected by DOMA, it is still necessary to introduce legislation to repeal DOMA and strike this law once and for all. I will introduce that legislation today with 39 cosponsors in the Senate.

“As a Californian, I am thrilled by the Supreme Court’s decision on Proposition 8. The court’s ruling on technical grounds leaves in place former Chief Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision that Prop 8 is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced.

“I believe this decision means marriage equality will finally be restored in California.”

From U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.:

“Today my spirits are soaring because the Supreme Court reaffirmed the promise of America by rejecting two blatantly unconstitutional measures that discriminated against millions of our families.
“I was proud to have voted against the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, and it is so heartening to see that the federal government will now treat all marriages equally.

“Because of the Court’s ruling on Proposition 8, millions of Californians will be able to marry the person they love – with all the rights and responsibilities that go along with it.”

From House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco:

“Today, the Supreme Court bent the arc of history once again toward justice. The court placed itself on the right side of history by discarding Section 3 of the defenseless Defense of Marriage Act and by allowing marriage equality for all families in California. The highest court in the land reaffirmed the promise inscribed into its walls: ‘equal justice under law.’

“Soon, the federal government will no longer discriminate against any family legally married in the United States. California will join 12 other states and the District of Columbia in recognizing the fundamental rights of all families. Our country will move one step closer to securing equal protection for all of our citizens.

“Nearly 44 years to the day after the Stonewall Riots turned the nation’s attention to discrimination against LGBT Americans, the fight for equal rights took a giant step forward. Yet even with today’s victory at the Supreme Court, the struggle for marriage equality is not over. Whether in the courts or in state legislatures, we will not rest until men and women in every state are granted equal rights. We will keep working to ensure that justice is done for every American, no matter who they love.”

Tons more, after the jump…

From Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland:

“This is an amazing day for marriage equality and for love. The Supreme Court’s decision striking down the Defense of Marriage Act is long overdue, and I could not be more excited. With this decision, the Court brought our nation one step closer to realizing our Constitution’s promise of equality for all Americans.

“As a Californian, I’m proud to welcome marriage equality back to our great state! This ruling on Proposition 8 gives certainty to Californians all across the state who can now get married and know that they are protected and recognized. This is a great step forward for equal justice under the law.”

“As a founding member and vice chair of the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus, I know that these decisions create a fairer and better nation. I know that we are stronger when all families are respected and supported. By these decisions, the Court has ensured that gay and lesbian married couples are fully and wholly recognized by their federal government, that they and their children are fully respected and embraced.

“However, there are still places in this country where discrimination stands, where hatred breeds fear, and we must make certain that everyone across America has these protections, and I will continue the fight for marriage equality.”

From Rep. Jackie Speier, D-San Mateo:

“This is a momentous step forward for civil rights. While the Court fell short of extending marriage equality to all Americans, its decision today ends the division of Californians into two legal classes. It ends the government’s role in deciding whose marriages, whose love, and whose families deserve full status in our state. It brings our country closer to the day when no Americans are devalued or discriminated against simply because of who they are.

“I had the privilege to marry 50 couples during the brief window in 2008 when gay marriage was legal and I am looking forward to doing that again once California officials clear the way for marriages to resume.
“LGBT Californians have endured years of public debate over their civil rights and their personal relationships. That debate is now over and all Californians are equal under the law.”

From Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose:

“I welcome the Supreme Court’s decision striking down DOMA as unconstitutional. Although today’s ruling only applies to couples legally married under state law, it will be marked as a turning point forward in the civil rights movement towards marriage equality for all. Not only was DOMA out of step with popular opinion, it institutionalized discrimination against lesbians and gays based purely on who they love. It’s a shame the House GOP irresponsibly wasted millions of taxpayer dollars over the past few years to defend the bigotry engrained in DOMA.”

From Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez:

“Today’s Supreme Court rulings mark an enormous step forward in the battle for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans to be treated as full-fledged citizens. Of course there is much more work to do to ensure full marriage equality across the country, but today signals a major advancement in this critically important struggle.

“And there is more work to do to protect the rights of all Americans, beyond the issue of marriage. Congress should now take the next step to ensure LGBT Americans are treated equally under the law by protecting their rights in the workplace and in the classroom. That’s why I’m calling on Congress to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and the Student Non-Discrimination Act so that we can move forward together to rebuild our economy without fear of discrimination and persecution of individuals just because of who they are or who they love.”

From Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose:

“The Supreme Court ruled the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional today in a great victory for justice and equality. No longer will legally married same-sex couples in this country be treated differently from anyone else. As vice-chair of the Congressional LGBT Caucus and as someone who lived under institutionalized discrimination myself, this is a proud and important day for the tens of thousands of married LGBT couples in this country and their families. And while the ruling in the Prop 8 case did not expand marriage equality nationwide – legalizing same-sex marriage just in California – I will continue to fight for our LGBT friends living in states that have banned same-sex marriage to experience this victory for themselves soon.”

From Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Pleasanton:

“Today’s decisions march us closer toward equality for all. With DOMA, the Supreme Court struck from the books a discriminatory law that drew a distinction between the love of same-sex couples and heterosexual couples. And today, the distinction has greatly narrowed, but we still have work to do.

“With respect to Prop 8: ring the chapel bells, same-sex marriage in California is back. This decision is sweet redemption for what we have always known in California: love is love.

“This is a victory for California and a victory for America. I am proud to stand with my gay and lesbians friends and family in celebration of these monumental decisions that end a discriminatory policy that denies federal benefits to committed and loving gay and lesbian couples. There are some 40,000 children in California that live with same-sex parents and these families deserve the same protections that my family enjoys.

“At the same time, we have work to do to continue the movement for equality. There are still 37 states that do not allow same-sex marriage, and I look forward to continuing my work in Congress so every American is treated equally under the law.”

From Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Napa:

“Today, the Supreme Court took a stand for equal justice under the law, ruling that laws that deny equality are immoral, unjust and unfair. This is a giant step forward, but we must continue working until every American has the right to marry whoever they love no matter where you live.”

From Rep. Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael:

“America is a symbol of freedom and equality, and today’s decisions brought us one step closer to realizing that promise for all Americans. DOMA was discrimination enshrined in law, and in striking it down, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed that equality is the bedrock principle behind our constitution. It does not guarantee equality for some Americans, but rather all Americans, and we must continue to work toward that goal.”

From Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto:

“Generations of Americans have fought for the preeminent promise of our country—that every person is afforded the same fundamental rights as stated in our Constitution, with the promise of liberty and justice for all.

“Today, the decisions of the Supreme Court make real the words and the promise of our Constitution by striking down unfair barriers for same-sex couples and returning marriage equality to California. Now, the fullness of our Constitution reaches into the lives of millions of Americans, making our nation a more perfect union.”

From Rep. John Garamendi, D-Fairfield:

“American history can be read as a gradual expansion of true equality under the law. Today, the arc of history bent further toward justice.

“I have long believed that all loving couples deserve the freedom to marry. Hundreds of thousands of LGBT Americans are building a life together, raising children, and are part of the fabric of communities throughout our nation. They deserve all the same rights that my wife Patti and I have, and I’m glad we’re one step closer to a country that treats everyone with dignity and respect.

“Marriage equality is now legal in California and federal marriage benefits have been expanded to married same sex couples throughout the country. Love wins every time and the march toward a fairer, more just America continues.

“We are a country that celebrates the ideal of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for everyone. Today, we came even closer to making that ideal a reality.

“This past weekend, I went to Philadelphia with my family and we visited the location of the Continental Congress, where the Constitution was written as a living, breathing document that could not foresee the issues of the future but provided a mechanism to resolve these issues. Our continued progress toward the fundamental values enshrined in this document is what makes our country great.”

From state Sen. Ellen Corbett, D-San Leandro:

“Today’s dual rulings on Proposition 8 and DOMA finally ensure the fundamental rights of all Californians to achieve equality under the law and not be discriminated against based on who they love. I am pleased that the Supreme Court chose to stand on the right side of history, as it has previously done related to racial and gender equality. I have always believed that the basic premise of Proposition 8 was deeply flawed and am pleased that, after today’s historic ruling, wedding bells will soon be ringing for all Californians regardless of sexual orientation. I thank the Supreme Court for taking an important step toward true equality and ensuring that all Californians have the freedom to marry the person they love. Let us continue fighting until all Americans can enjoy true marriage equality in the months and years to come.”

From state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco:

“Today’s decisions are defining moments for our country, landmark affirmations of basic civil rights by our nation’s highest court and long sought victories for thousands of couples who wish to honor their commitment to one another through the institution of marriage.

“By striking down DOMA and ending the exclusion of California’s same-sex couples and their families from marriage, the Court’s decisions further fulfill the great promise of our Constitution and Declaration of Independence that all men and women are created equal and as such must be treated equally under the law.

“This day could not have arrived without the courageous efforts of civil rights pioneers who bravely fought for legal recognition of our rights and humanity. Today we pay tribute to them, knowing they have helped pave the way for millions of LGBT people to live happier and more fulfilled lives, which will only benefit their families and the rest of society.

“Today is also an affirmation of the power of coming out, telling our stories and putting love and authenticity foremost in our lives. With legal doctrine, legislative victories and public opinion increasingly on our side, LGBT Americans can finally envision a day where future generations will look back and wonder how this outcome could have ever been in doubt and why it took so long to happen.

“While today’s victories are monumental, we still have much more work to do in order to achieve full equality across the United States and globe. Our struggle will continue until every man and woman can proudly marry the person he or she loves and have that right fully respected under the law.”

From state Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco:

“It’s a wonderful day for Californians who believe in equal rights for all. In 2008, Proposition 8 stripped the right to marry from LGBT citizens, while DOMA imposed an unprecedented standard that allowed states to ignore marriage contracts formed elsewhere in our nation. Today the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the fundamental ideas our nation was founded upon and taken a step towards equality and fairness. Now that the laws that held same sex couples apart have been found unconstitutional, we can finally live up to our creed that all people are created equal. I look forward to again officiating at weddings for all couples who wish to marry, this time knowing that their right is here to stay.”

From state Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord:

“A big part of California’s strength is its rich diversity and tolerance. Today’s Supreme Court ruling is great news for all Californians. I am reminded of Martin Luther King’s excellent quote: ‘The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.’”

From Assemblyman Rich Gordon, D-Menlo Park:

“Marriage equality has been a priority and a dream of the LGBT community for decades. Today, with the Supreme Court’s announcements, we are realizing that dream and we now celebrate equal marriage rights for all Californians.

“In 2008, I had the privilege of marrying my partner of 26 years. This was one of the greatest days of my life, as we were finally able to stand together and say, in front of our friends, family and loved ones, ‘We are a family.’ This is an experience that many loving couples have been unjustly denied until now. We are not just a gay couple; we are two individuals who are deeply in love.

“Furthermore, with the high court striking down DOMA, this is truly a historic day for all Californians and all Americans who value fairness and equality. The institution of marriage not only provides over 1,000 legal and financial privileges, it is a powerful symbol of a couple’s love and commitment. It is something to be cherished and shared.

“The passage of Proposition 8 was a dark day for individual freedoms and rights. The ban on marriage equality came as shock to most; but we have learned from our missteps, recovered and continue to march on.

“While this is a day for celebration, we must also remember that our work is not yet done. Only thirteen states and the District of Columbia have achieved the dream of marriage equality. However, public opinion is rapidly changing. In May alone, Rhode Island, Delaware, and Minnesota achieved marriage equality, and for the first time ever a majority of Americans now favor equal marriage rights. With momentum on our side, we will not rest until every American can exercise their right to marry who they love.”

From Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley:

“This week, 44 years ago, the gay rights movement ascended from the Stonewall riots in New York, catalyzing today’s historic ruling in favor of marriage equality. Today, justice for all has been served. Marriage equality in California will move forward and we can see a path to marriage equality throughout the U.S.

“As a proud PFLAG mom, I look forward to my role as a state legislator, along with my legislative colleagues, to ensure California’s laws comply with the court’s ruling.”

(Referring to her constituent Kriss Perry, plaintiff in one of the cases decided Wednesday, and her fianceé Sandy Stier) “California has two courageous women to thank, for fighting the good fight. Their efforts affirmed a basic human right that will enable my daughter and all Californians, regardless of sexual orientation, to be treated equally under the law.”

From Assemblyman Paul Fong, D-Cupertino:

“The U.S. Supreme Court took an important step by striking down the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act. It correctly rights a wrong in our country’s history and provides for equal treatment for same sex couples under federal law. The Court’s ruling guarantees equal protection to all members of our society, regardless of sexual orientation. Though the decision was not a universal decision on the constitutionality of same sex marriage, I am heartened that same sex marriage can continue in the state of California. This is a historic victory but our nation’s movement for equality and justice for everyone in this country are far from over. As we move forward, we must remain committed to fight discrimination and to protect the rights of all Americans.”

From Assemblyman Bob Wieckowski, D-Fremont:

“With today’s decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court our state and nation have taken a giant step forward in the historic march for equality. No longer will California couples be denied the right to marry – and the legal and financial benefits that go along with marriage – solely because of their sexual orientation.
“The momentum is strong, but the struggle for marriage equality will continue in those states that still discriminate. I am confident that someday all Americans will enjoy the rights that Californians now have as a result of this historic day.”

From Assemblyman Kevin Mullin, D-San Mateo:

“This is a great day in America. Today’s rulings are a major step forward in ensuring equality for all. This should send a strong message to those supporting intolerant policies that, in a civilized society, we need to treat everyone with dignity and respect regardless of who they love.

“This will clear the way for same sex couples to receive the same legal protections, health benefits, tax benefits, and pension benefits as more traditional couples. My bill AB 373 fixes this for CalPERS long-term care policies. There will likely need to be more expansive pieces of legislation conforming other benefits to account for this historic ruling.”

From Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco:

“Thank you, Supremes, for stopping the Proposition 8 and DOMA madness in the name of love. Now any Californian will be able to marry the person he or she loves and the federal government will recognize that marriage. This is not total victory, of course. There are LGBT people in most states who don’t have marriage equality yet. The fundamental questions are of justice and equality and the Supreme Court’s recent rulings on voting rights and affirmative action make it clear that these struggles don’t end all at once. We still have to watch out to protect the rights of lesbians, gays and transgender people – and all people who suffer discrimination or inequality for any reason. Let’s keep building on the Bill of Rights, and make sure no one loses out because of where they come from, because of how poor they are or because of who they love.”

From Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Oakland:

“Today’s decisions mark the turning point in the legal battle for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender rights and equality. As an attorney experienced in and committed to civil rights issues, I am encouraged that the Supreme Court had the moral and constitutional insight to recognize the failings of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and rule it unconstitutional. The decision is particularly meaningful today as we are just just two days shy of the 44th anniversary of the start of the Stonewall Riots in New York City which ushered in the gay civil rights movement.

“The ruling on Proposition 8 allows two loving adults in California to enter into marriage, regardless of their gender. While it was my hope that the Supreme Court would have more broadly ruled in favor of justice and equality by holding Proposition 8 unconstitutional, their more narrow ruling on the standing of the parties invalidates Proposition 8 and legalizes gay marriage in California.

“I am proud that the San Francisco City Attorney’s office took a leading role in the legal battle for marriage equality since 2004 while I was working as a Deputy City Attorney. The San Francisco City Attorney’s Office was the first governmental entity in American history ever to legally challenge marriage laws and the only law office to be involved as a party in every aspect of the legal battle since 2004. As a Deputy City Attorney for the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office, I was proud to be at the forefront of the historic legal battle for marriage equality in California. Now, as an Assemblymember for the 18th Assembly District, I am looking forward to continuing the fight to allow every loving couple to be married not just in California, but across the nation.

“Sixty four years after Perez v. Sharp invalidated interracial marriage bans in California, and forty six years after Loving v. Virginia extended those protections across the nation, I am hopeful and confident that the march of progress will continue and one day soon marriage equality will be the law of the land.”

From Assemblywoman Nora Campos, D-San Jose:

“What a historic day for justice and equal rights in America today.

“The U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed the values of commitment and enduring love by striking down the Defense of Marriage Act and upholding a lower court’s ruling that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional, paving the way for same-sex couples to be able to marry in California.

“Everyone who has married remembers the joy of that day. Soon all Californians will have the ability to experience that beautiful moment.

“Obviously, much work needs to be done. Let’s hope that states will end the business of erecting walls against LGBT couples who want to marry. I hope that one day the right to marry will extend to all couples in the United States.”

Josh Richman

Josh Richman covers state and national politics for the Bay Area News Group. A New York City native, he earned a bachelor’s degree in journalism from the University of Missouri and reported for the Express-Times of Easton, Pa. for five years before coming to the Oakland Tribune and ANG Newspapers in 1997. He is a frequent guest on KQED Channel 9’s “This Week in Northern California;” a proud father; an Eagle Scout; a somewhat skilled player of low-stakes poker; a rather good cook; a firm believer in the use of semicolons; and an unabashed political junkie who will never, EVER seek elected office.

  • JohnW

    Surely there must be some entertaining reactions from people on the other side of this issue.

    I logged on to SCOTUSblog.com at 7 a.m. and followed their moment-by-moment coverage. As things progressed, I could feel the ground shake and the institution of marriage fall apart right before my eyes.

  • Elwood

    I want to marry my lovely sheep Fluffy!

  • MichaelB

    Don’t you just love all of these so called liberals/progressives talking about the “Constitution”, “civil rights”, “justice”, “equality”, “respect”, “equal protection”, etc. on this issue? Society must accept gay marriage without question or immediately face accusations of intolerance/erosion of rights?

    But watch what happens when it’s about the 2nd Amendment. People legally owning guns really don’t “need” them and are “facilitators” of “gun violence”. These same politicians always seem to find a away to support anything/everything with the word “gun control” in it (for law abiding people) every time without fail. And then lecture everyone how it’s really “reasonable” and “sensible” to erode freedoms (ban more things and pay lip service to going after criminals) because they just “know better” or it’s “for the children”.

    Only a supposed “extremist” would dare oppose them (the guy who sued Washington DC elected officials because they wouldn’t let him legally own a gun for his own protection in an area with rampant crime) and stand up for the Constitution.

  • JohnW

    #3 MichaelB

    Do you mean “liberals/progressives” like Justice Kennedy (appointed by Reagan) who wrote today’s DOMA opinion? By the way, he also was in the majority in the “Heller” second amendment decision.

    Or perhaps you mean liberals/progressives like Ted Olson, co-counsel for the plaintiffs in the Prop.8 case. His liberal credentials include being Assistant Attorney General under Reagan and Solicitor General under Bush43. Damn bleeding heart liberals!

  • JohnW


    If you want to marry your sheep, Fluffy, go ahead. Just make sure you get Fluffy’s written consent. Society will recognize your arrangement, but it probably won’t be the affirming recognition you might want.

  • Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

    @5 You have a good sense of humor today.

  • RR senile columnist

    Ok single moms on welfare, no excuse not to get hitched

  • Elwood

    On second thought, I want to marry my sister Mary and my cousin Jim.

  • JohnW


    Well, you could marry your sister and cousin, to each other!

    In light of today’s Prop. 8 decision, I see no impediment to you marrying cousin Jim. According to Wikipedia, first cousin marriage is allowed in California and 20 other states. To my surprise, Kentucky and West Virginia are not among them. Whether your cousin Jim would want to marry you is another matter.

    Now, unless sister Mary is a nun instead of a sibling, I foresee obstacles. However, there have been cases of people getting married, only to later discover that they are brother and sister. Bummer!

    Actually, you raise an interesting point. There are biological reasons for siblings not to marry and procreate. However, those reasons would not apply in the case of two brothers or two sisters getting married.

  • Publius


    I think MichaelB meant the progressives like Bill Clinton who signed DOMA into law and Barrack O who ran in 2008 as an opponent of same sex marriage.

    I really don’t care about gay marriage. I do care about the hypocrisy on the left when it comes to liberty.

  • JohnW


    Bill and Barrack “evolved” on the issue.

    As one radio talk show host observed today, all politicians can be accused of hypocrisy. It’s bipartisan.

    Seriously, hypocrisy to me is about politicians who take a holier than thou position on an issue in public and then do something quite different in private.

    In MichaelB’s example, it’s not hypocrisy (in my opinion) to argue a liberty and equal protection case for marriage equality but to argue a public safety case for constitutional gun regulation (background checks, for example). It would be hypocrisy to be for restricting “assault rifles” and high capacity magazines while secretly maintaining an arsenal of heavy duty firearms at home.

    I don’t have a problem with politicians “evolving” on issues — whether it’s due to an honest change of opinion or in a political context. I’m not looking for puritans. I’m looking for people who understand that politics is the art of the possible and who know how to get good things done. Compromise is not a dirty word.

  • JohnW

    To use a different example, people who are pro-choice on abortion often accuse conservatives of hypocrisy if they are pro-life on abortion and also pro-death penalty.

    I’m pro-choice (or pro-keeping government out of the decision) and anti-death penalty. But I don’t think it’s hypocrisy to oppose abortion and be for the death penalty.

  • MichaelB


    A public safety case?

    Is that your excuse for the failed Washington DC firearms bans that all of the so called “progressives” defended on the Supreme Court? Public safety was WORSE off after the handgun bans were passed there. The recent US senate hearings indicated the previous federal “assault weapons” ban failed to reduce violence. Maybe it’s time for you to “evolve” on this issue and realize gun control advocates don’t care about facts at all. Evidence/common sense/records of previous records of success are not on their side.

    What do “background checks” have to do with banning firearms from law abiding people?

    Compromise is a dirty word on this issue when it comes to the left because they don’t. They just want more and more and never agree to repeal existing regulations. Some of us do not want a New York City style gun ownership process implemented nationwide.

  • MichaelB


    Progressives use the Constitution and “rights” when it suits them. Obama himself said he wanted to “fundamentally transform” the nation. That’s clearly NOT defending the Constitution which is supposed to be the job of the President.

    No surprise here since they just want/rely on government empowerment to “solve” things (at the expense of personal liberties). And appear to define “success” by government dependency rather than self reliance.

    The 2nd Amendment (and other limits on government control/power) isn’t worth defending at all because it gets in their way of doing the so called “public good” (that only they claim to know what that is). It’s not considered “good” to them that people keep more of their own income/wealth instead of sending it to the government, that they have means to defend themselves, etc.

    But “free” health care, racial preferences, entitlement programs, amnesty for illegals and a “fair distribution of income”, etc. ARE somehow “rights” and need to be defended.

  • Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

    I hope to go to a same sex wedding, as soon as possible. The girls are so sweet. They are both 21 & have never been in love with anyone else. I thought they were merely best friends, until I asked the mother of the girl I’ve known since she was seven.

  • JohnW


    If you want argue about guns, fine. But the point of my post was not about that subject. I was addressing the issue of hypocrisy that you raised. Your point (correct me if I’m wrong) was that is is hypocritical for people to argue for liberty on one issue (for example, marriage equality) and then not embrace the liberty argument on another issue (e.g., guns). I disagree. People on both the left and right us that faulty logic of linking two unrelated subjects all the time to put down people who disagree with them on issues. I pointed out an example of how death penalty opponents (of which I am one) often say it is hypocritical of people to be “pro-life” and “pro-death penalty). I disagree on that too. It’s sloppy reasoning.

    Since you brought up the DC gun ban (since over-ruled by SCOTUS in the Heller decision), I don’t think it was ever a good idea to have a law preventing people from keeping a firearm in their home for protection. The Heller decision was about whether the 2nd amendment confers an individual right to possess firearms. I mostly agreed with the decision but thought it bizarre that the court totally dismissed the first thirteen words of the 2nd amendment as being irrelevant to understanding the meaning of the amendment.

  • JohnW


    It is amazing how rapidly public opinion has “evolved” on the subject of same sex marriage over the past several years. Other than Prohibition, I can’t think of any other issue that has, on one hand, been so divisive and, on the other hand, shifted so quickly in the public opinion polls.

  • Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

    @17. There’s nothing fast about the evolution of accepting same sex love. It’s good for the economy. What better way to boost spending, then to have more people getting married. There are still many people who don’t get it. The only slower evolution, is decriminalizing prostitution & stupid weed.

  • JohnW


    Spoken like a true libertarian. But some of us evolve more slowly. I’ve always considered myself progressive about gay rights and was always for civil unions. But I viewed same sex marriage as being on the fringes of the gay rights agenda. When Gavin Newsom ordered the City to issue marriage licenses in 2004, that was while I still lived in Denver. But it woke me up to the fact that this was a bona fide equal rights issue, much as JFK’s televised speech in 2003 was a wakeup call for me on civil rights.

  • Elwood

    “JFK’s televised speech in 2003 was a wakeup call for me on civil rights.”

    Well, I reckon it would be, inasmuch as Kennedy was assassinated in 1963.

  • Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

    Busting & prosecuting people for prostitution & stupid weed, is easy money for police, D.A.’s, judges & it keeps prisons full. All those people who own the politicians & the corrupt media. Or are the people in the media, just stupid & lazy, like the people who smoke stupid weed for breakfast, lunch, dinner & bedtime?
    I think John Wuss is smoking to much stupid weed. He missed 40 years & still thinks the media tells the truth. Duh!

  • RR Senile Columnist

    I miss the days of “Bush an’ Cheney, you can’t hide.! We charge you…” Call me nostalgic, but those were simpler times.

  • RR Senile Columnist

    #19: How did I miss your 85th birthday? Congrats, John.

  • JohnW

    #20 and 23


    Well, my post could be interpreted in one of two ways.

    One would be that I meant to say 1963, when I was in high school and a fan of JFK impersonator Vaughn Meader.

    The other would be that what I meant to say was that I finally got around to watching JFK’s speech in 2003, whereupon it became my somewhat tardy wakeup call on civil rights.

    You can probably guess which statement was intended.

  • RR senile columnist

    John, when did change your mind about fluorinated water?

  • JohnW


    As soon as I figured out the term “fluorinated water” didn’t refer to the condition of the swimming pool after the five year olds finished.

  • Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

    Alzheimer’s and smoking stupid weed, have the same results. They both make people forget what brilliant idea they were talking about, in mid sentence. With Alzheimer’s type dementia, they forget what year it is. Or forget who is dead & who is alive. But they remember the distant past vividly.

  • RR senile columnist

    Hey folks, what happens if yer spouse changes sex after a few yrs? Does the law now mean yer still married?

  • JohnW


    If it was a marriage between people who were opposite sex at birth, the fact that one of them changes gender identity during the marriage would have no legal effect. That happens fairly often.

    It can be a different story if the marriage is between two people who were the same gender at birth but were opposite sex when they married (after one had changed gender identity). In some states, that would be viewed as a same-sex marriage and would, therefore, not be treated as a legal marriage. See Texas inheritance case in link below.


  • Elwood

    I want to marry my lovely sheep, Fluffy!

  • JohnW


    But what does Fluffy want?

  • Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

    There seems to be quite a few people who know how to write on this blog, but have dementia. The first sign of dementia, is repeating the same story. See #2 & #30. This story was about the happiness created by same sex marriage. Now some old geezers want to discus bleeping some sheep, that probably does not exist. Duh!

  • JohnW

    #32 Bruce R. Peterson

    Justice Argle-Bargle Scalia would a would find the farmological humor a real knee-slapper.

    Just imagine what the jokes must have been after passage of the 19th Amendment (women’s suffrage) and the SCOTUS decisions on school integration; inter-racial marriage; and, over the objections of Justice Scalia, telling the state of Texas to stay the hell out of people’s bedrooms.

    I wonder what kinds of jokes people would make if we ever elected a black president. Oh, I forgot!

  • Elwood

    Yes, Fluffy loves me!

    Yes, Fluffy loves me!

    Yes, Fluffy loves me!

    Her bleating tells me so!

  • Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

    @33. Thanks for encouraging me to look up Justice Scalia. He seems to be a living contradiction. Brilliant, Catholic ultra conservative. But he hasn’t been out in the public for 27 years, or more. I love talking to people I have never met before.
    I always thought Clarance Thomas was the worst Supreme Court Justice. A black who hates blacks, LGBTQ’s, women & just about everything.

  • RR senile columnist

    Justice Scalia and Danny DeVito were separated at birth.

  • Elwood

    This blog is moribund.

      Use Moribund in a sentence
    [mawr-uh-buhnd, mor-] Show IPA
    in a dying state; near death.
    on the verge of extinction or termination.
    not progressing or advancing; stagnant: a moribund political party.

  • Josh Richman

    All dressed up and nowhere to troll, Elwood? I never dreamed you’d miss me so badly.

    I took Friday off to spend with my son, and today I was out helping to cover the BART strike. I expect I’ll be serving up a steaming hot plate of fresh bloggage tomorrow, so y’all come on by, y’hear?

  • Elwood
  • Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

    @ 2,30,34 & 39. Be careful what you wish for El Woody. You will have to have health insurance for Fluffy when you marry him/her. Your freaky kids (if Fluffy is female), will need health insurance too. Will you invite Josh & me to your sheeple wedding? Fluffy does look a bit young, to be getting married.