There has been a lot of finger wagging about the Spokane City Council devoting its Monday night meeting to a public outpouring over the state’s new gay marriage law. Some of my co-conspirators in the media argue that council members should stick to topics that are within the scope of their control. That’s one way to look at it. The wrong way, alas. Now I won’t argue the logic. I agree it’s a waste of time for the City Council to get bogged down in nonbinding resolutions like gay marriage. And that’s a bad thing, how? Look at it this way. For this one glorious Monday evening … No parking meter rates were raised. Not one more red light intersection camera was installed. While citizens wrangled passionately over the definition of marriage, our hamstrung leaders couldn’t come up with any new ways to pick our pockets/Doug Clark, SR. More here.

Question: Would you rather see your City Council get bogged down on nonbinding resolutions involving topics like gay marriage than to handle its usual business?

The debate on gay marriage is headed to the Spokane City Council. City Councilman Jon Snyder is sponsoring a nonbinding resolution in support of “marriage equality,” and despite a Republican-leaning majority on the City Council, it appears the resolution is on track for approval. “People need to understand that this is not a Seattle or West Side issue,” Snyder said. “We have gay and lesbian citizens all across Washington and a lot of them see Spokane as a place where they can make their home.” Spokane City Councilman Mike Allen, a Republican precinct committee officer, said he likely will support Snyder’s resolution. “The Constitution says all are created equal,” Allen said. “I don’t know how you could do a ‘separate but equal’ in this particular category”/Jonathan Brunt, SR. More here.

Question: Is “marriage equality” an issue that you would want to see the Coeur d'Alene/Post Falls/Hayden/Rathrdum city council take a stand on?

No, my fellow conservatives, the world as we know it did not end Monday when Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire signed gay marriage into law. For that matter, her signature did not even do significant harm to the institution of marriage. After this last week's assault on religious liberty by the Obama regime, small government conservatives should be particularly sensitive when government tramples upon issues of faith. And when government intrudes upon the religious institution of marriage, it does harm both to the church that yields government sovereignty over marriage and to marriage itself. Gays cannot possibly do more damage to marriage than heterosexuals have already done through its secularization/Michael Costello, Lewiston Tribune. More here.

Question: What has damagd the institution of marriage most during your time on Earth?

Jon Downing thinks maybe he'll get married in two decades. Not because the 29-year-old necessarily wants to wait. But that's when he suspects it will finally be legal for him to do so in Idaho. “I'm hoping two years out,” said Downing, a Coeur d'Alene resident open to admitting he is gay, even when he expects a variety of reactions. “But the reality is it's probably going to take a little bit longer to change people's hearts and minds.” There are signs to indicate it's already happening, with same-sex marriage legislation whipping through the Washington Legislature and gaining approval on Wednesday, the day after the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down California's Proposition 8 outlawing gay marriage. Idaho following soon might be a tall order/Alecia Warren, Coeur d'Alene Press. More here. (AP file photo of a same-sex cake decoration in New York City)

Question: Do you think Idaho will legalize gay marriage in the next decade?

• Tuesday Poll: 108 of 182 respondents (59.34%) agreed with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision overturning a ban on gay marriage in California. 72 of 183 respondents (39.56%) disagreed. 2 (1.1%) were undecided.
• DUI Legislators: Overwhelmingly, Hucks Nation says that Idaho legislators should be booted from their leadership positions if they're found guilty of driving while intoxicated or drug abuse. 104 of 133 respondents (78.2%) held that position. Only 27 of 133 (20.3%) said the legislators shouldn't be rousted from leadership positions. 2 respondents were undecided.
• Today's Poll: Should a two-thirds vote be required before the Idaho Legislature can raise taxes?

Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich on Tuesday decried the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for striking down California's Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage — both of them targeting the judiciary system for invoking what Gingrich described as a “radical overreach” of power.
Prop. 8 was a California ballot measure passed in 2008 that amended the state's constitution to make same-sex marriage illegal. (The California Supreme Court had ruled in 2008 that same-sex couples legally had the right to marry)/CBS News. More here. (AP photo)

Reaction?

• Monday Poll: 92 of 175 respondents (52.57%) said Catholic universities, hospitals, and charities should be forced under new Obama health care rules to provide insurance for workers covering birth control. 79 of 175 respondents (45.14%) said Catholic institutions shouldn't be forced to go against church doctrine to complay with federal mandates. 4 were undecided.
• Today's Question: Do you agree with the decision by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals outlawing a ban on gay marriage?

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Tuesday struck down Proposition 8's ban on gay marriage in California. The Ninth Circuit's ruling is likely to be appealed to the US Supreme Court, which has never before decided on the constitutionality of laws that prohibit same-sex marriage. California voters passed Proposition 8 in November 2008 with 52.4 percent of the vote. The measure outlawed same-sex marriage in the state by amending California's constitution to only recognize marriages between men and women. The California Supreme Court ruled that the amendment was valid, but in August 2010 US District Judge Vaughn Walker nullified Proposition 8 for violating the due process and equal protection rights of gay men and women guaranteed by the US Constitution. Three Ninth Circuit judges unanimously affirmed Walker's ruling Tuesday/New York Post. More here. (AP photo: Steve Harris carries a sign against gay marriage outside of the courthouse before a hearing in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday in San Francisco)

• Idaho judge gives only dissenting opinion in Prop 8 ruling

Question: Agree/disagree with ruling?

But even if last week’s ruling (striking down California referendum that marriage is between a man and a woman) stands it will not be the end of the marriage debate. It may only launch the next chapter in the saga. And the next few rounds of this fight could change some folks who today support the ‘right to marry’ into opponents. The bigamists will do it. That is, if courts decide marriage is a Constitutional right, then it applies to bigamists as well as homosexuals. While dirty old men who take young girls as brides will always be despised by sane folks, it would be legal if courts deem marriage a ‘right.’ With the age of consent (if there is such among ardent polygamists) we’re talking some very young brides indeed. The age of consent is as young as 14 in some states and is 16 in most states/Dan Hammes, St. Maries Gazette-Record. More here.

Question: Will polygamists someday have a right to marry as many females as they want, and as young as they want?

Item: Judge declares US gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional /Michael Levenson, Boston Globe.

More Info: A federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman. Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government’s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws.

Question: Do you agree/disagree with this ruling?

“The California Supreme Court upheld a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage Tuesday, but it also decided that the estimated 18,000 gay couples who tied the knot before the law took effect will stay wed.”
Full story here: http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2009/may/26/calif-high-court-upholds-gay-marriage-ban/

Locally, two rallies will be staged to protest the decision: Spokane: 5 p.m. at City Hall, 808 W. Spokane Falls Blvd. Moscow: 8 p.m. at Friendship Square

What do you think about the court’s decision? Surprised?