(Untitled)

[qsafm5]

Nancy Pelosi? Might as well just hold the meetings for the House in hell, because that's where it's going. Not the Senate though because right now it still looks okay, but if it ends up going to hell as well, I just hope Bush decides to pull a Nixon post-1972 and really throw the Dems into a rage. At least we've still got the Presidency for 2

Comments

[anonymous]

even worse, in the "i disown wisconsin" group:
"i just hate the stupid hicks in Wisconsin who are retarded and use their personal and religious beliefs when voting. If I am correct, we are suppossed to seperate church and state"
HOLY HELL. what are people supposed to vote based on, if not their personal (including religious) beliefs? AND this amendment (as far as i understand it) has nothing to do with church and state--it's defining marriage. yarrrr.
funny, though, that wisconsin remains blue and votes for this one, and michigan remains blue and votes for banning affirmative action...strange

[anonymous]

people who are living in abusive relationships (in the same residence as the abuser) will no longer be considered to be in a domestic relationship because and relationship 'substantially similar' to a marriage will not be recognized in the state. the abuser will be charged with a misdemeanor, the same charge as through s/he were to punch someone on the street, rather than with the felony charge of domestic abuse.
having been in an abusive relationship, the so called 'gay marriage ban' took away rights of a lot more people than just gays

[qsafm5]

OH NOES! AN ANONYMOUS POSTER HAS STRUCK AGAIN! What you said doesn't change the fact that a good majority of Wisconsin voted in favor of the amendment.

[anonymous]

hm... thanks, you must know how it is to be in an abusive relationship and have your protection taken away by others in your state who are afraid of gay marriage
i know i do

[eobanb]

At least I can take solace that Jim Sensenbrenner was re-elected

Uh, why? That's all I can really ask.