I'd like to ask for Sinead's hand in marriage

Via Gay Family Values:

You may have already seen this, but I think it's just brilliant.

Ask A Gay Family

I posted about these guys a while back. And since then they've started a new series called Ask a Gay Family.

If the regular Gay Family Values videos were excellent in representing the qualities of gay families and the inherent lack of honesty in the arguments of the anti-gay-marriage folks, this series promises to bring more positive attention to the truth about gay families. Jay, Bryan, Daniel, and Selena are not only a positive loving family but also a set of role models and an excellent example of what a family should be, gay or otherwise.

Albania!

Via Big Gay News:

According to an Associated Press article yesterday, the Albanian government has proposed a law that would legalize same-sex marriages. From the AP:

Albania's governing Democrats have proposed a law allowing same-sex civil weddings in the small, predominantly Muslim country.

An announcement on the government Web site Thursday said the bill "may spark debate" but was needed to stop discrimination against gay couples. Current law only recognizes heterosexual marriages.

Prime Minister Sali Berisha said the move followed requests from rights groups. His Democrats, who control 74 of parliament's 140 seats, are expected to easily pass the law.

Sure, the move may have a great deal to do with Albania's desire to join the EU. Sure, the law may shock and appall the rather conservative and traditionally majority Muslim people of Albania. But when it comes to civil rights, doing the right thing shouldn't really be left to popular vote. (Civil rights legislation for African Americans would have never survived a popular vote in the U.S.) If Albania of all places can see the value of protecting the civil liberties of its people, you'd think the rest of the civilized world could follow suit.

Uh Americans, I think it might be your turn...

Blame it on the Gays

Via See My Briefs:

Catchy and kind of funny too. His other stuff can be seen here.

The Reception

Alright, I've got a few spare moments to write about our reception while the husband and the boy are out grocery shopping:

We had it at Cafe Sitges right after the ceremony. It was absolutely amazing. The guys really outdid

themselves. It was exactly what we wanted: something simple, casual,

and friendly. The food was excellent, especially the marinated quail eggs. The layout was perfect for the number of people there. The decorations were lovely. I couldn't have been happier with the way the whole thing turned out.

I do

wish James and Andrew, the guys who run the cafe hadn't been quite so busy so they could hang out as well. But I can't compliment them enough on the way they hosted the event.

They were even able to bring in

the tunos we had heard play there before. So the music was excellent.

I can't remember everyone who stopped by (some were the husband's friends I didn't know and I think at least one was a crasher). But let me hit a few highlights (read here people who traveled to attend): Chuck I've already mentioned. He was the husband's former partner and long time close friend. He came in from Los Angeles. Like at the ceremony, he took video, which I may be able to post on Youtube later.

Michael, one of our earliest and dearest friends in Sitges came in from France where he's been working lately. Andrew, another early Sitgean friend arrived from the UK for a few days. John, one of the sweetest and best people we made friends with in Sitges, and without whom Sitges has been much less t

olerable also came in from the UK.

And lest I forget to mention her, Irene our first, good friend we met in Spain, came in from Cerdanyola. She was an absolute delight and really made the event special as did all of the great people who showed up.

I had two major fears about the reception going in: that people who don't really like us would come and be obnoxious, and that the open bar would entice some people to behave in an unpleasant manner. Both of these fears were totally unfounded. The day was so hot people mostly stuck to cava. An

d the few people I was unsure about coming didn't show up. Everyone was lovely, and I hope they all had a great time. I certainly did.

Gay Marriage

As you know I got gay-married a couple weeks ago. Since then I've been on my honeymoon and the boy has been with us (more about that later). So I haven't had much time to actually blog.

The ceremony itself was simple, just like we wanted it to be. Actually, our intention was to have the ceremony just us and family. Of my family (a cast of thousands) only my son was able to come. My daughter decided she wanted to "stay home and be bored" this summer instead of spending it with me. I was admittedly a little hurt by her declaration. But I understand. She's 11, and right now the whole gay dad t

hing is a bit weird for her. And she's pretty much a major home body, (like her father) she'd be more than happy to pass the time holed up in her room reading rather than... well... just about anything. That and I believe she's still worried about her mother because of her earlier health issues. The rest of the family, as great as they have been, either aren't comfortable enough

with the whole gay thing or simply can't afford to travel right now.

Of the partner's family one brother was supposed to have attended. He was supposed to be our witness. He came. He fought with the partner. He declared his disapproval of our marriage (despite being [I can't say he's gay because I wouldn't want to share his personal business] himself ). He mooched room and board off of the partner for a couple more days. He left before the wedding. The partner's other brother couldn't make it because of family responsibilities. His parents frankly weren't told. His father is an anglican minister and has fought homosexuality his whole life (don't you just love the irony of a man with such hateful opinions having two non-heterosexual sons?).

So the wedding party included the partner and

me; my son; Chuck, the partner's former partner and long-time close friend; our gestor, a legal representative; and the judge. Chuck took video, and the boy took photos.

We wore white, but not suits. The judge passed his written speech to the gestor, who translated. He informed us of the laws, and then delivered our vows.

We exchanged rings. And then he pronounced us married.

I know I keep harping on this, but I just think that what happened next was truly spectacular. A couple of signatures were required and then the judge gave us our libro de familia, our family book. (It even has space to list ch

ildren produced by our marriage should such a miracle happen.) This is our official and legal marriage document. This is the exact same document that all married couples in Spain receive, regardless of their gender or sexual orientation.

Spain is probably one of the most fervently and rigidly Catholic countries in the world. But the Spanish are not going to let their own personal beliefs interfere with the basic civil rights of others. They do what's right despite what they've been taught by religious leaders.

The only issue was that we had written the wrong time down and showed up thirty minutes late thinking we were thirty minutes early. But that didn't cause any problems. The ceremony was thankfully short and sweet. From there we headed out to the reception.

Get me to the church on time

Alright ladies and gentlemen and the rest of you, no more bitchy posts for a little while. I'm getting married today! 

Gay Family Values

Have you seen the videos by these guys yet?

They're a married gay couple in California with two kids. I picked the particular video I posted because they're reading a book I used to read to my kids all the time (they're a little old for it these days). If you have a YouTube account you should subscribe to these guys. Their videos are just great. The more people who see their example of a "normal" family who just happen to be gay the better. 

Someone Else 2012

Via The Huffington Post:

What the FUCK?

The Obama administration has gone from annoying inaction to downright animosity. The administration has filed a motion to dismiss the case of a married California couple who are challenging the 1996 [sic] Defense of Marriage Act. In their incendiary filing the Obama administration makes the usual one-man-one-woman bullshit arguments we've seen too much of recently. 

From The Huffington Post:

U.S. Department of Justice lawyers argued that the act _ known informally as DOMA _ is constitutional and contended that awarding federal marriage benefits to gays would infringe on the rights of taxpayers in the 30 states that specifically prohibit same-sex marriages.

"The president made very explicit and emphatic campaign promises that he opposes DOMA and would provide leadership calling on Congress to repeal it," said Jennifer Pizer, marriage project director for Lambda Legal. "This brief is not consistent with that promise."

Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said Friday that the department is abiding by its standard practice of defending existing law and that the filing doesn't mean Obama has changed his mind about wanting to see gay couples win federal recognition.

"Until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system," Schmaler said.

More than four months into his first term, Obama has been under growing pressure from gay rights activists who supported his candidacy to move forward on repealing DOMA and the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that prevents gays from serving openly in the military.

That's it. I'm done. If Obama doesn't take immediate action to undo the damage his people have done. If he doesn't start fulfilling his campaign promises. Then I'm going to do whatever I can to help someone else win the presidency from him in 2012. We had enough of lies, deciet and double-talk during the last administration. 

Gay-Marriage Bans Increase HIV Infection Rates

Via Gay News Blog:

According to an Emory University study, increases in HIV infection rates can be tied to the atmosphere of intolerance that surrounds bans on same-sex marriage. The Southern Voice quoted a press release stating:

“In the first study of the impact of social tolerance levels toward gays in the United States on the HIV transmission rate, the researchers estimated that a constitutional ban on gay marriage raises the rate by four cases per 100,000 people.” 

This makes sense. When HIV/AIDS was first spreading like wildfire through the gay community it was in a country that still persecuted gays. People were made to feel like they had to hide what they were and what they did. That sort hostile environment leads to risky behavior. 

Hugo Mialon, one of the economists who conducted the research said, "Intolerance is deadly. Bans on gay marriage codify intolerance, causing more gay people to shift to underground sexual behaviors that carry more risk."

Talking Equality

Via Slog:

I think I've posted one of this guy's videos before. But I think what he's doing is important. His ideas are solid and his arguments reasonable. He blogs over at Waking Up Now. 

It's true. I keep hearing the same bigoted claims against gay-marriage over and over and over again. It's nice to have a voice of reason out there. 

I knew I Loved These Guys

Garfunkel and Oats recently posted a pro-gay marriage music video. It's a response to Pat Robertson's claim that legalizing gay marriage would inevitably lead to legalizing sex with ducks. 

Enjoy.

Meeting the Judge

Today we met the judge who will perform our wedding ceremony in July. I was, suffice it to say, quite nervous about the experience. 

Why was I apprehensive? (Aside from the obvious reasons like we're two men getting married in a predominantly Catholic country and this guy pretty much has the authority to refuse to marry us just because he doesn't want to.) I've done this before. The last time I got married circumstances were quite different. And yet that time too, there was a meeting with the official beforehand. 

When the ex-wife and I got married back in those hazy youthful days clouded by societal compulsion we met with the minister. He officiated at a small-town Kentucky church and went by the title Brother Dan. Or at least I think it was Dan. Anyway it was Brother and some normal name like Bill or George or Dan. He was something of a last resort as we had left a few important details of the wedding to the last minute. 

That meeting was a bit scary. There were difficult essay-type questions like: What are your expectations of the duties of your future wife? and What precautions will you take so as not to bring children into this marriage until you've both had time to navigate the challenges and difficulties of married life?

And then there was the biggest scariest question of all: Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal lord and savior? I had an easy dodge for that question. I was baptized and confirmed in my parents' church back home in Georgia. (This was before I did enough thinking to realize I didn't agree with all the hypocrisy and bigotry inherent in the church.) So Brother Tom understood me to be a confirmed member of the flock and no problem. But when the same question was posed to my then-fiance the answer was a little trickier. You see, she has never been so foolish as to be taken in by the church's tricks. And she's WAY too honest a person to just lie about it so we could avoid a confrontation. No, she told Brother Ted, she'd never really been to church other than as a child when her grandparents took her on sundays to fill in her coloring books on the pew beside them. 

I could tell by Brother Bill's expression he wasn't too pleased with this answer. He pressed her further. Wouldn't she feel more comfortable knowing that her soul could avoid eternal damnation by simply accepting Jesus Christ as her personal lord and saviour. He could do it that day. All they'd really have to do was to say a prayer asking Jesus into her heart. It wouldn't take a moment. 

No, she wouldn't have any of it. She's not exactly an atheist, but she's sure as hell not going to lie and say she believes the church's take on Jesus. Not even as an expedient to making sure Brother Tom will marry us. She pretty much told him point blank she wouldn't say his prayer because she won't lie. Brother Jeb meanwhile was developing a stress tick in the muscles of his forehead. He would have really liked to refuse to marry us. But thank goodness the ex-wife's sister was one of his faithful church members. He eventually relented. But he expressed his strong reluctance and admonished her to think about the precarious condition of her hell-bound soul. 

So like I said ladies and gentlemen and the rest of you, I was just a wee bit petrified of reliving that historical pre-wedding interview. 

But (thank Brother Bob's Jesus) this experience was completely different. First, he greeted us warmly, confirming our names as he shook our hands. He is a man probably in his seventies with uncontrolled wisps of white hair and a paternal smile. Then he took us into the chambers where the wedding ceremony will be performed. It's a wood-paneled room with a big desk at the front and benches in the back much like you might find in the courthouse of any small town. "You sit there," he indicated two thick chairs in front of the desk. "But not right now, on the day. Some people are so eager they jump right in when I show them," he joked. (I'm paraphrasing as my Spanish is fairly imperfect.)

Then he took us to his office. He gave our documents a cursory glance and then described to us the options we could include in our ceremony. He showed us pictures of other weddings he had performed. "You can bring in flowers. You can have pictures made. You can even hire a musician. Will you be using rings?"

We told he we would. 

"That's fine, that's fine. Flowers, music, rings are all fine, but the important thing, the thing we can't do it without, is the two of you." All those concerns I had about being gay, being foreign, or being otherwise rejected melted in his genuine friendliness. "And two witnesses with their passports," he added with a smile. 

We confirmed our details on the paperwork and signed a document confirming our appointment for the wedding. He bid us a kind farewell, adding the Spanish equivalent of "A pleasure to have met you."

Same-sex marriage in Spain (unlike many of the unions legalized throughout the civilized world) is the exact same thing as heterosexual marriage. You get the exact same "family book" (the official marriage document) as the straights. The benefits and responsibilities are exactly the same here. I went into this meeting today with all kinds of trepidation. I expected reluctance. I expected disapproval. Instead the judge treated us no differently than he would any couple. Why can't it be like that everywhere? 

A Step (Or Two) In The Right Direction

OK ladies and gentlemen and the rest of you, I was trying to avoid some of that political stuff for a while and concentrate on more personal posts. The result? I just avoided posting. But I have to celebrate a couple of really great things that have happened in the US recently. 

Really great thing number one: same-sex marriage passes in Maine!

Really great thing number two: The Washington D.C. Council voted to recognize same-sex marriages performed in states where it is legal!

Of course the uber-conservative lunatics immediately lashed out against both the moves. Remember the cracked-out D.C. Mayor Marion Barry? He rather vocally opposed the measure on moral grounds. And isn't it lovely that he was the ONLY council-person to do so? 

And then there are the folks in Maine who are gearing up to fight to have voters repeal the legislation. Bishop Richard Malone has appeared at the forefront of the anti-gay-marriage movement. He called same-sex marriage a "dangerous sociological experiment" and went on to yammer the usually unfounded b.s. about protecting children from the scary homos. Same-sex marriage will have to be taught in schools? Is "opposite-sex" marriage taught in schools? I've never seen it in any of the standards or the curricula of any of the states where I taught. It's an absurd claim. But YOU already know that, don't you ladies and gentlemen and the rest of you?

Anyway it's nice to see some good stuff happening back in the ol' red-blooded white-skinned blue-balled U. S. of A. 

BTW, Don't miss Jon Stewart's take on the whole thing. (I would have put it here but I can never get Comedy Central's stuff to embed.)

Massachusetts Ministers on Gay-Marriage

Via Good As You:

You've heard me harp on same-sex marriage endlessly. This is a pretty interesting video given all the arguments about how same-sex has wrecked Massachusetts and will carve a streak of god's wrath through the US. 

Monday's Minute of Anti-Hate

Frank Rich over at the New York Times wrote an excellent op-ed column a couple of days ago. Everyone should take the time to read it. It makes a lot of sense. He begins breaking down the silly fear-mongering of "The Gathering Storm."

Far from terrifying anyone, “Gathering Storm” has become, unsurprisingly, an Internet camp classic. On YouTube the original video must compete with countless homemade parodies it has inspired since first turning up some 10 days ago. None may top Stephen Colbert’s on Thursday night, in which lightning from “the homo storm” strikes an Arkansas teacher, turning him gay. A “New Jersey pastor” whose church has been “turned into an Abercrombie & Fitch” declares that he likes gay people, “but only as hilarious best friends in TV and movies.”

And he finishes discussing the imminent demise of the anti-gay-marriage movement.

As marital equality haltingly but inexorably spreads state by state for gay Americans in the years to come, Utah will hardly be in the lead to follow Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa and Vermont. But the fact that it too is taking its first steps down that road is extraordinary. It is justice, not a storm, that is gathering. Only those who have spread the poisons of bigotry and fear have any reason to be afraid.

These two quotes are just a tiny piece of the well-written well-thought whole. 

Don't Start Spreading the News Yet

Thought I might throw my two cents in on the whole gay-marriage in New York issue. 

The New York Times reported a couple days ago that Governor David Paterson planned to introduce legislation today that would make it legal for same-sex couples to marry in New York. It sounds like good news riding on the wave of Vermont and Iowa, of all places. 

But then LGBT groups started complaining about the timing. Apparently nobody was ready for this. It's beginning to look like there's no way the legislation could possibly get through the Senate. And some of the bill's supporters have indicated they might prevent it from getting to the Senate floor until it earns enough votes to pass. Others have decried Paterson's actions as just trying to garner votes for reelection. 

From the New York Times:

The fact that Mr. Paterson is introducing a bill does not, however, mean that action in the Legislature is imminent. It could take months — even longer — before the bill makes its way through the appropriate committees and onto the floor of the Senate and the Assembly.

“This is not a guarantee of anything,” said Assemblyman Micah Z. Kellner, a Democrat from the Upper East Side who noted that it took two months for legislation legalizing same-sex marriage to get through the Assembly in 2007 before it ultimately stalled. The Senate never acted on the bill.

The legislation is likely to have an especially bumpy ride in the Senate, where more lawmakers oppose same-sex marriage than support it. Gay rights advocates are now actively seeking more senators, both Democrats and Republicans, to vote for the bill.

The impression I get is that Paterson is trying to make a statement. He seems to be getting a message out there without really thinking through what his message would ultimately say. He probably shouldn't have moved without the support of some of the many LGBT organizations in New York. 

But Ultimately he may be right. With the right kind of motivation from the Governor, legislators and activists might get out there and make gay-marriage happen for New Yorkers. Who knows, backlash from the newly throned anti-gay Catholic Archbishop Timothy Dolan might even help the cause. Naysayers can moan about poor timing and questionable motivations all they want to. If the governor's move leads to more civil liberties for LGBT folks. Who cares?

Monday's Minute of Hate

For this week's minute of hate let's focus on the National Organization for Marriage, that delicious progenitor of hate speech with the Orwellian name. (To any wingnuts out there it's Orwellian because they seek to deny marriage rights not protect them. 

see also 1984.) NOM recently spent a lot of money to produce this hilarious video:

According to CBS news the ad's creators are trying to counteract some of the negative impacts gay marriage has had on states where it is becoming legal. From their April 8 article:

Ben Smith reports that the National Organization for Marriage is spending $1.5 million to air the spot in an effort to turn back the tide of gay marriage, which was yesterday legalized in Vermont. The spots will air in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, and Iowa. 

The group does not back away from the ad's argument that same-sex marriage has a direct, negative impact on non-gay people. 

"The biggest argument – and the biggest lie – put forward by those who want to redefine marriage is that it's not going to have any effect on you," NOM executive director Brian Brown told Smith. He added that those who back gay marriage "are saying that it’s right for the law to treat us as evil discriminators." 

Of course if you're going to be an evil discriminator you should expect to be treated as an evil discriminator. They go on to discuss how Catholic charities have stopped handling adoptions because of lesbians and gays wanting to adopt. If an organization wants to put ridiculous bigoted minor religious tenets above the welfare of children they should go out of business. The kids who need to be adopted are better off being handled by non-discriminating organizations rather than being socialized to believe in a dying blood-sacrifice cult led by a fag-bashing ex-Hitler youth (in Prada) anyway. 

Ever since the ad came out a great buzz has been circulating in the LGBT media. First, the audition recordings for the individuals speaking in the ads came out, and LGBT organizations started screaming that the people in the ad weren't even who they said they were. Well, of course actors aren't who they say they are. That's not a big deal. An actor is a person who pretends to be someone else for money. No surprise there. It even says so in the tiny print at the bottom of the ad. 

Far more heinous are the misrepresentations spoken by the actors in the ads. The Human Rights Campaign posted a rebuttal refuting some of the claims in the ad:

The general argument of the ad is that the push for marriage equality isn’t just about rights for same-sex couples, it’s about imposing contrary values on people of faith.  The examples they cite in the ad are:

(1)   A California doctor who must choose between her faith and her job

(2)   A member of New Jersey church group which is punished by the state because they can’t support same-sex marriage

(3)   A Massachusetts parent who stands by helpless while the state teaches her son that gay marriage is okay

The facts indicate that (1) refers to the Benitez decision in California, determining that a doctor cannot violate California anti-discrimination law by refusing to treat a lesbian based on religious belief, (2) refers to the Ocean Grove, New Jersey Methodist pavilion that was open to the general public for events but refused access for civil union ceremonies (and was fined by the state for doing so) and (3) refers to the Parker decision in Massachusetts, where parents unsuccessfully sought to end public school discussions of family diversity, including of same-sex couples. 

Really if a doctor is going to refuse to treat a patient for some silly reason that has nothing to do with preserving the health and welfare of the patient (i.e octomom's doctor should have refused to treat her) that doctor should have his or her license removed. Facilities open to the public should be open to the public. If you want to discriminate on who gets to use your facilities keep them private. And if you're such a shitty parent that you expect schools to teach your kids morals, you should have your kids taken away from you. Get involved in your kids lives and teach them what you'd like for them to believe. Better yet, shunt them off to a religious school where they can become indoctrinated zealots like you and live in a fairy-tale world where a dead Jewish guy and a goat-footed demon do invisible battle with magic all around you every day. 

Aaah, I feel better now I've got that off my chest. Really ladies and gentlemen and the rest of you, I don't hate religious people. I just don't see why so many of them speak "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" out of one side of their mouths and use deceit and scare-tactics to manipulate the opinions of all the gullible Americans out there with the other. Isn't lying and bearing false witness against their Mosaic law? 

Monday's Minute of Hate

"...by force of law, now, every school child in every state school in Iowa by force of law will be forced to be taught that homosexual behavior is the equivalent of heterosexual behavior. Every school child will now be told that it's not a mother and a father. It's a significant other or a spouse."

The disdain in this guy's voice is pure sweetness. I know, I know. If you've been paying attention you've already seen this, but I think it's just lovely. Especially the guy with the mustache to the right who grunts sadly every few seconds. They seem to be having a very, very, very bad day. 

The fundamentalists are out there already crying unconstitutional. They're whining about protecting children. What are they protecting children from exactly? The terrible knowledge that a couple of fags can do just as good a job at raising kids as a man and a woman, if not better? The horrible possibility that two women might love and care for one another for the remainder of their lives? Sheesh people.

And to think this happened in Iowa of all places. Not in the fancy un-American Yankee wasteland of New England. Not in the tofu-eating toffee-nosed den of iniquity that is California. No. Civil rights have come to the homeland. Some conservative judges have looked at this issue and seen through popular opinion to what's right. 

Maybe this marks a shift. Maybe Americans will realize that if we relied on popular opinion to make the right decisions, we wouldn't have anything like civil rights for African Americans or votes for women. The simple truth is that Americans have tended to follow some pretty silly ideas in the past. And don't tell anybody, but they've used the Bible to justify their hateful ideas in those cases too. 

Hooray for Iowa! And thank goodness Iowa's legislative system is set up so it'll take two sessions to put a constitutional amendment to the people. That means a vote shouldn't be able to happen until they've had a while to recognize that squirrels aren't going to start marrying cockroaches and the world isn't going to fall apart. 

P.S. Some of the comments below this video on the Youtubes are worth seeing for their hilarity. Like:

Have each and every one of us looked at the way a great percentage of these Homosodomites DO NOT believe in God?
Well I am starting to recognize this...........What is my point? Gee lemme see.. they wanna preach love and tolerance but don't believe in God? Hmmmmm......Satan is working his magic people wake up here......

Satan is working his magic people? WTF? I wish I could work some of my magic people. Speaking as a Homosodomite (sic), I don't go to church because those people are crazy. They don't know how to use ellipses. They end paragraphs with random collections of words and periods. And they believe in invisible magic beings. What is my point?

Sweden to Allow Same-Sex Marriage

Via Joe. My. God.:

Another country is now officially freer than the United States of America. According to a TopNews.in article the Swedish parliament voted by large majority to approve a measure that will allow same-sex marriage. The new legislation goes into effect May 1, replacing one that allowed gays and lesbians to have civil unions.

From Top News:

Only the Christian Democrats, one of the four parties in the ruling centre-right coalition, opposed the move.

Yvonne Andersson said her party wanted to maintain "a several hundred-year-old concept" about marriage.

Supporters of the gender-neutral legislation included Evon Frid of the Left Party who said it was "not a negative change, but a positive change."

The proposal was approved by a 261 to 22 vote, with 16 abstentions.

Yes, all you nuts who are still trying to socialize my children to believe the US is the best country in the world, IT'S NOT. Effing Sweden is better than the US. Not only do they make some kick-ass meatballs and some of the most intelligently-made, easy-to-assemble, perfect-for-any-space-except-a-tacky-one furniture, but they also don't let their stupid prejudices get in the way of doing what's right. Add the Swedes to the growing list of decent upstanding citizens of the world. A list that includes Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, and Spain. 

Gee, South Africa just got rid of Apartheid a couple of decades ago. What's up with you Americans dragging your feet? Do you not see the world laughing at you for your ridiculous outdated social policies especially those your imaginary friend told you to make?

P.S. What's up with the wing nuts not agreeing on how long the whole one-man-one-woman marriage thing has been going on? Several-hundred years? Two-thousand? Three? In case you can't even bother to look it up, polygamy was officially outlawed in the US in 1878. That means your ancient definition of marriage is pretty new. Hmm, 131 years is little more than a bad habit. Thirty days in rehab ought to clear that up.