In 2005, homophobic lawmakers in Texas inserted this clause into the state constitution: “This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.” Their intent was prevent same-sex civil unions, but instead their incompetence may have opened the door to costly lawsuits and expense to the state.

Watching dethroned pageant queen Carrie Prejean throw a passive hissy fit on Larry King's show made me feel relieved she wasn't endorsing an issue important to me. Since I see her as an agent for arrogant intolerance: social, religious, intellectual, take your pick, those are not values I wish to embrace, I couldn't help but enjoy her juvenile antics on a national stage. In fact, I want to share this delightful segment with those of you who missed it.

Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a Houston lawyer and Democratic candidate for attorney general, says that a 22-word clause in a 2005 constitutional amendment designed to ban gay marriages erroneously endangers the legal status of all marriages in the state. The amendment, approved by the Legislature and overwhelmingly ratified by voters, declares that 'marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.' But the troublemaking phrase, as Radnofsky sees it, is Subsection B, which declares: 'This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.' Architects of the amendment included the clause to ban same-sex civil unions and domestic partnerships. But Radnofsky, who was a member of the powerhouse Vinson & Elkins law firm in Houston for 27 years until retiring in 2006, says the wording of Subsection B effectively 'eliminates marriage in Texas,' including common-law marriages."

Another state finally coming around! Kentucky Equality Federation applauds legislation pre-filed by Representative Mary Lou Marzian (BR 93) to place the issue of same-sex marriage or civil unions back in the hands of Kentucky citizens. Earlier this year, Kentucky Equality Federation and Marriage Equality Kentucky began collecting signatures to present to lawmakers to repeal the law by giving voters another opportunity to vote on the issue. The "Marriage Declaration," started in July 2009. "I realize some will turn this into a religious debate, but we have separate of church and state; the Kentucky Constitution clearly states 'absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority,' and that is exactly what Section 223A of the Constitution has done. The Constitution also states 'the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching.'"

I can't believe my paper printed this letter--"...the male can certainly place his life-giving fluids into the female's fruitful organs." It's the weirdest argument against marriage equality I've seen yet. Should priests be thinking about the "fertilizing donation into her productive anatomy"? Bring me my pearls, so I can clutch them, and a glass of water to pour into my lap.

Rhode Island is 37th of the 50 states on the Happiness Index, while Massachusetts--just spitting distance away-- is in the top 10. Rhode Island's Governor is a fierce opponent of marriage equality, whereas Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage years ago. Coincidence? I think not. Maybe that's why they call it being 'gay'.

Watching dethroned pageant queen Carrie Prejean throw a hissy fit on Larry King's show made me feel relieved she wasn't endorsing an issue important to me. Since I see her as an agent for arrogant intolerance: social, religious, intellectual, take your pick, those are not values I wish to embrace, I couldn't help but enjoy her juvenile antics on a national stage. In fact, I want to share this delightful segment with those of you who missed it. She is certainly royalty in her own imagination. I imagine another designation for her, but I will refrain from mentioning it. Are those of you who think she speaks for you sure you want her representing you?

Press attention, money, and political capital in Maine focused on a wedge issue — gay marriage. But proponents and opponents alike used plenty of money from outside the state to influence the vote.

So perhaps branding is the problem. Maybe in advocacy situations it's better to persuade based on the facts of the issue, rather the whether it is red or blue. If advocates in Maine could harness their residents' attachment to liberty, common sense and independence (with a healthy dose of facts about how legalizing gay marriage would actually add to state coffers and not subtract from heterosexual marriages), the choice might look more right vs. wrong, rather than right vs. left.

Glenn Stanton of Focus on the Family writes in the Philadelphia Inquirer that adoptive families are less than other families, and as such allowing gay marriage, and thus gay adoption, should be opposed. In doing so he harms adoptive families across this country, in direct violation of my family and of Focus on the Family policy. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Utah accidentally discovers a move that will save more marriages than all the anti-gay laws in the book. A four-day work week. Hardworking parents get some relief from the daily commute and a little more time at home. And the state saved money too.

A video of Philip Spooner, an 86-year-old D-Day veteran who spoke at a Maine Judiciary Committee meeting in favour of gay marriage, has become a moving internet hit.The video shows the veteran addressing the committee in a faltering voice, saying: “Good morning committee. My name is Philip Spooner. I am 86 years old and a lifetime Republican.” He said: “I am here because of a conversation I had last June, when I was voting.“The woman at my polling place asked me, do I believe in equality for gay and lesbian people.“I was pretty surprised to be asked a question like that. It made no sense to me.“Finally I asked her: what do you think I fought for in Omaha Beach?”He says that he and his late wife of 54 years had four sons together, one of whom was gay, and all four of whom joined the services.“I was raised to believe all men are created equal,” he says, “and I have never forgotten that.

"A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have. Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long."

A Dallas judge rules that Texas' ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional.

"Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill said it appears unlikely that Congress will block a bill to be introduced Tuesday that would allow same-sex marriages in the District."

"In a first for Texas, a judge ruled Thursday that two men married in another state can divorce here and that the state's ban on gay marriage violates the U.S. Constitution. Both a voter-approved state constitutional amendment and the Texas Family Code prohibit same-sex marriages or civil unions. Although the case is far from settled, and the state's constitutional ban on gay marriage is a long way from being thrown out, Dallas state District Judge Tena Callahan's ruling says the state prohibition of same-sex marriage violates the federal constitutional right to equal protection."

That our society has an interest in coherence and strength and commitment and mutually reinforcing loyalties, then if gay couples want to call their union marriage and a state agrees, and several have now, or a religious body will sanction it, and I don’t think a state should be able to stop a religious body from saying it, I don’t think the rest of us should get in the way of it. I think it’s a good thing not a bad thing. And I just realized that, I was, probably for, maybe just because of my age and the way I’ve grown up, I was wrong about that. I just had too many gay friends. I saw their relationships. I just decided I couldn’t, I had an untenable position.

The headline of the Sept. 14 Maine Voices commentary by Tim Russell – co-founder of The Maine Marriage Alliance – reads: "There's lots of proof same-sex marriage will harm the rights of others." We read the column to find there is no proof whatsoever and lots of opinion based on religion.

Statistics show that Florida and Indiana have the highest divorce rate and Massachusetts the lowest. How do heterosexual couples manage to stay together in a state full of gay Unitarians? Or is unemployment what is really stressing relationships? Should the defenders of traditional marriage get a job?

It's great that Frank and Pelosi are advocating for ENDA and the repeal of DADT, but their reasoning against the Respect for Marriage Act is disrespectful. The fact that President Obama -- as well as his Justice Department, which is charged with legally defending DOMA in court -- came out and said that DOMA should be repealed is courageous, albeit in an obtuse way. And it's promising that one of Bush's independent thoughts was that it would be inappropriate to denounce same-sex marriage before a bunch of college students. But just not saying, "You can't get married" is not the same thing as saying "Yes, you can."