Judge Halts Gay Marriages in Ore. County
(AP)

Judge denies bid to stop gay marriages

Judge halts gay marriages in Ore. county

Judge Denies Bid to Stop Gay Marriages
(AP)

S.F. Judge Won't Halt Marriages (Los
Angeles Times)

Judge Bars R.I. Man From Sending 'Spam'

Judge Bars R.I. Man From Sending 'Spam'
(AP)

Jackson judge bars computer evidence

Judge Bars Forced Anthrax Shots

U.S. Judge Bars Limits on Imports of
China Textiles

Jackson judge bars computer porn from
trial

Jackson Judge Bars Neverland Computer
Evidence

Judge Bars Computer Porn, Lawyer Takes
Ill

U.S. Judge Bars Limits on Imports of
China Textiles (Reuters)

Jackson trial judge bars prosecution's
computer evidence

"Gay Marriages"

State to allow gay marriages

California annuls gay marriages

US court rules on gay marriages

Indian Arranged Marriages

"CNN.com - S.F. same-sex marriages
voided - Aug 12, 2004"

Gay Marriages Affect Businesses

Computer bug wrecks marriages

"same sex marriages in my fair
commonwealth"

CNN.com - S.F. same-sex marriages voided
- Aug 12, 2004

cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/12/samesex.marriage.ap/index.html
track this site | 3 links

New kinds of marriages in Massachusetts

Our home state of Massachusetts has been in the news recently for a positive decision on gay marriages.  It would seem that the next natural step would be state recognition of other types of alternative unions.Apparently we don't think heterosexuality is worthy of special legal treatment anymore.  Why should duality be favored then over plurality?  Why can't a voluntarily polygamous family or polyandrous family apply for a marriage license?  The cultural and cross-cultural precedent for polygamy is certainly much stronger than for gay marriage.

My friend Richard and I were flying to Bradley Field in Connecticut today (excellent airplane museum) and it occurred to us that this could solve America's health insurance problem.  Consider 50 uninsured people.  They could all get married in one big union.  One of the 50 could take a job with really good health benefits, e.g., for the government.  The other 49 would then get spousal health benefits.

Programs Try Down-to-Earth Aid for
Marriages

No on 36: Help save Oregon marriages

Plenty has been written about the mastery of language in use by conservative think tanks these days and I'm reminded of it every time I turn on the news or watch a discussion show featuring conservative guests. I used to discount the importance of language and framing of issues as overly simplistic, but this really is the death of liberals right now. It's in the liberal nature to tell both sides of the story and/or go for a nuanced discussion of issues, but people don't have time or energy to keep those kinds of things straight on hundreds of subjects in the news. I'm constantly impressed by conservatives that can gain traction with somewhat crazy ideas, but do it using such simple language that leaves little room for interpretation.

One instance that is driving it home for me is seeing signs for prop 36 in Oregon. Proposition 36 is the vote on a change to the State Constitution, to clear up the ambiguous language that says "anyone over 18 can marry..." so that is says "A man and a woman over 18 can marry..." I hear the issue is currently polling at around 50%-50%, which surprises me because I thought gay marriage had zero chance of survival in the wild, but looking at the signs it's clear that the No side's language isn't helping them, while the Yes side is killing it.

The No on 36 folks have these complicated signs that say "no on constitutional amendment 36" and although the NO and 36 are the biggest things on it, it still requires them to push a negative with a screaming NO on it. The color is drab and you can't read the words "constitutional ammendment" from a car. The Yes folks have a great distilled message, with multiple colors. It says "One Man. One Woman. Yes on 36." It's simple, concise, and gets the point across without the need for a five-syllable word.

So here's the thing: why don't liberals champion the power slogan? Why can't liberals drop the "yeah, but..." from everything they want to say? Conservatives never feel the need to spell out the specifics, or the drawbacks, or the exceptions, while liberals are almost happy to do it. It obscures the message when you have to add "yeah, but..." to everything you say.

Here's my suggestion for the No on prop 36 folks: Go simple. Your new slogan is "Support Marriages. Support Families. No on 36." That's it. You don't have to explain these are new marriages or expanded definitions of family, just go with short, emotional slogans. People love marriage. People love family. A no vote on 36 means thousands of marriages don't have to be dissolved.

Just as a conservative might repeat the phrase "Progress in Iraq" over and over, you could easily spin gay marriage as a way to encourage more marriages, help create more happy families, and help spread love instead of hate. And when your opponents try to point out "but! but! you're going to ruin civilization!" you can ask they why they hate the institution of marriage, why they want to deny love, and why they want to break up families.

And you can't argue with that on a 2 foot-by-3 foot sign at 60mph.

Portland's Mayor of Wi-Fi

Legal gay marriages in the United States

Massachusetts has become the first state in the US to allow same-sex couples to get married. Whether it will last or be crushed under the weight of a Constitutional amendment I don't know, but it's bloody wonderful in the meantime:

Other towns and cities across the state were also prepared to wed large numbers of same-sex couples as the law came into force. The Supreme Court ruling upheld a decision by the state's highest court. It said that denying marriage licences to same-sex couples violated anti-discrimination laws.

The Massachusetts ruling has fuelled heated debate across the country - and the controversy has been particularly intense in an election year. In a statement, President Bush said he had called on the Congress "to pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of a man and a woman as husband and wife. The need for that amendment is still urgent, and I repeat that call today." His rival John Kerry - who is a Massachusetts senator - is also opposed to same-sex marriages, but favours a more limited form of legal recognition.

I think the issue of gay marriage only started to matter to me when I realised that many of my gay friends actually wanted to get married. And on the day when a friend of mine showed me a marriage booking form online in San Francisco and I started looking for the section for gay people and there wasn't one - It was all the same form... That affected me too I think - to realise that while it was clearly an issue at the moment, the whole point of this battle was about completely collapsing that difference around relationships. That's a pretty cool goal...

Read the comments

Mass. Warns Officials About Gay
Marriages (AP)

Just goes to show arranged marriages
rock

Massachusetts Hours Away from Legal Gay
Marriages

Calif. Court Voids S.F. Same-Sex
Marriages (AP)

'Fake marriages network' smashed

Supreme Court Won't Block Gay Marriages
(AP)

Path Clear for Same-Sex Marriages in
Mass. (AP)

N.Y. Judge Bars Mayor From Gay Marriages (AP)