Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (93988)	11/5/2008 11:21:41 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541582

Yes, I just checked the official CA site, and saw the same thing. I guess the CNN story just had the numbers backwards. I gather from some other sources that the numbers flipped when more votes were counted. I'm beginning to think that gays in the USA are going to have to been content with civil union type laws. The word Marriage has to much religion in it for too many voters. Of course if it took 140 years from slavery until we elected the first black Pres, how long before we elect the first gay one? Given the in closet character of gay life up until the last several years, we may have well elected a gay president in the past. Who knows. My vote for the first gay president, as of this morning, goes to Rachel Maddow. What happens to existing CA gay marriages? Laws usually can't be retroactive. I agree. But my impression is that this proposition changed the constitution. So it has more status than "laws."