Minnesota for Marriage reminds us:
"VOTE YES NOVEMBER 6TH! Leaving the ballot blank counts as a "no" vote!"
Smart little boy. "Like."
More like a little boy who does not understand the politics behind the sign that he is holding.
I am glad this child is on the right track to have a normal decent life.
There's nothing political about a child being raised by his married mother and father. It's natural. Even a child knows that.
@ Jon - What's the matter Jon, knowing that your side is going to lose all 4 states, could that be it?
Marking Jeff's comment above for a gloating response tomorrow.
The boy has to hold the sign because it's the only way to keep homosexual "marriage" advocates from stealing it.
Election Night, Tomorrow the tears.
Tragedy tomorrow, comedy tonight.
No, my problem is using young children for political purposes. I thought that would be pretty obvious from my comment.
So far, traditional marriage has an overwhelming win in exit polling... Its going to be a GREAT night for marriage, but a great victory for children.
They're all close, close races. We need every vote.
@Jeff, M. Jones, Preserve Marriage
That's 4/4 for SSM. GG and good night, everyone!
What a GREAT victory for ALL families and children. NOM, you are on the wrong side of history. People 50 years from now, will look on you as the George Wallaces of this era.
It is sad day for those states that was decieved into voting for same sex "marriage". This is what they are getting:
Homosexuality will be taught in the schools.
Following one conscience will be subjected to punishment.
Traditional Marriage supporters will be persecuted.
More houses of worship will be vandalized.
Doctors will no longer be able to say that lifestyle choices is hurting thier gay patients.
More frivolous lawsuits clogging the courts.
Increases in social diseases, and the list goes on.
The statement about that same sex "marriage" not impacting anybody (so say gay advocates) was a lie then, now and always. Time to take a stand. I think the gloves should come off in whatever action is needed to correct this.
Will there be a new generation of children that don't know that the union of a man and a woman is uniquely special, and used to be celebrated as "marriage" in a thing we called "weddings" (which only ever included one man and one woman)?
Or will it still exist, under a different name, with children just learning in history books that it used to be called "marriage".
Will grandpa sit with his grandchild on his lap and say, "When I was young, this "[fillintheblank]" used to be called "marriage", and nobody questioned whether it could be anything other than the union of a man and a woman. Then the homosexual special rights lobby came along, largely unopposed, and got "marriage" redefined as the union of two adults, regardless of gender.
Then people started calling the union of a man and a woman, "[fillintheblank]". They called the "marriage" of a man and a man, or of a woman and a woman, "gay marriage" -- even though the homosexual special rights people fought that.
The laws started to recognize [fillintheblank], because "married" men and women had children so often, and people realized what we always knew -- that children did better when raised by their [fillintheblank]ed mom and dad.
Then the polygamists came along and said marriage "discriminated" against them. They demanded "marriage equality" ....