We know why she'll lose BIG TIME!
wahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, poor thing, NOT!
She said that means not only defining marriage as between one man and one woman but ensuring that government does not grant "substitutes" to marriage.
We made the mistake in California of restring the marriage amendment to marriage only and not to civil unions as well. Now we have a "Marriage in all but name" bill passed in our legislature. Good luck Arizona.
I don't know what they call a "domestic partner", but if it applies to situations where people are living together just to share expenses, this is going to backfire on them. There are plenty of older women in that situation and if they get affected by this the lie-berals will make hay out of it (not to mention the fact that it will just be another case of oppressive government - not that anyone cares about *that* any more, but...)
A great developement! Hopefully more and more states will get these amendments. We will NOT accept further degredation of this 2000 year old institution upon which western society is built, as appeasement to 2% of the population.
A great developement! Hopefully more and more states will get these amendments. We will NOT accept further degredation of this 2000 year old institution upon which western society is built, as appeasement to 2% of the population.
those who come to the polls largely to vote against same-sex marriages are likely to be those who would vote for a Republican like J.D. Hayworth or Rick Romley, potential general-election foes for Napolitano.
GO J.D.!!!!