CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
December 10, 2008 10:35 PM UTC
25 Comments
as a corollary to Godwin’s Law or something.
If you call your opponent a terrorist, you lose.
if we can call them the Taliban, it’s fine if they call us al Qaeda. All’s fair.
It just makes the opposition to same-sex marriage look absurd, foaming at the mouth and hyper-reactionary. Or, i should say, makes them look even more so.
While I do think some of the anti-prop 8 protests were out of control and not cool, I have this sneaking suspicion that gay people are here to stay…
Someone should tell Pat.
BTW can someone tell me why this isn’t up to the individual churches whether or not to marry gay couples?
It’s up to individual churches whether they will marry straight couples.
Try getting married in a
Catholic(insert religion A) church if you are aPresbyterian(insert religion B) and see how far you get.If all churches would come to a consensus, no one would perform gay marriages. This issue didn’t crop up in the first place because of Justice of the Peace weddings. Huge wedding in MA, Episcopalian bishop. Poor Pat can’t get branches of his own camp straight, pardon the term, so he’s inflicting the fight on us. I wish he’d stop. You’re right, they aren’t going away, but all of this nonsense gives me headaches.
http://www.edgeboston.com/inde…
Kind of like the same way individual churches can currently refuse to marry certain heterosexual couples?
My parents were divorced and each subsequently married a new spouse. Yet they were limited to civil ceremonies only because our church (Roman Catholic) would not allow either of them to marry in the church.
I don’t take issue with that decision by the church. Churches get to decide whether or not to perform a religious ceremony for a couple getting married. Has been that way ever since the Free Exrcise Clause of the First Amendment has been in existence.
It’s the prohibtion on the civil marriage that’s the only problem as far as I’m concerned.
but in this country what makes marriage legal is the civil aspect. To be legal it involves a marriage license and a marriage certificate from the state. A religious ceremony is entirely optional.
Plenty of heterosexual couples are married by secular officials such as a Justice of the Peace. On the other hand if you only have a religious ceremony but with no marriage license or marriage certificate from the state you are not legally married. Common law marriage is likewise a matter for the state, not religious authorities.
Legal marriage is therefore already a civil, not religious, institution. This does not compel the clergy of any religion from declining to marry couples for religious reasons. For instance, it’s always been perfectly legal in the US for Jews to marry non-Jews but Orthodox Jewish Rabbis have always refused to officiate at such marriages. They aren’t compelled to simply because it’s legal. Religious freedom allows them to do as they as they see fit.
So nothing at all has to change in order for gays to marry other than the recognition that they are as entitled to legal marriage, a civil institution, as anyone else. This would allow gays to marry without forcing a single clergy person to perform or church to sanction any marriage unless the clergy person so desired or the church approved. Simple equal rights with no interference with anyone’s religious rights. Simple as that.
As usual, I was being snarky. For individual Churches to rail against a civil marriage is, well, ‘not cool’.
There are all kinds of people that get married in civil services that have no impact whatsoever on my family or marriage. Funny, but I have a feeling that gays would have the same effect on others’ families.
In fact a committed same gender couple with very nice children lives down the block from us and so far we have experienced no inexplicable desire to get divorced. We don’t see how that would change if the couple made it legal.
in place of 72 virgins?
to a Madonna-Cher tour.
She and God are pretty tight up there.
…it’s been done to death
Some friends of mine dressed up for Halloween one year in camouflage and giant bonnets – aka Gays in the Millinery.
Pat Boone displays his chosen lifestyle.
for this level of homophobia. See any number of gay-bashing Republicans in the news over the past few years.
all the Republicans would take advantage…
of a proposal.
Now I can add Pat Boone to my list of random people’s junk I’ve seen. I wouldn’t have clicked, but I thought it was a euphemism.
Now I know not to click.
I will never be able to view the contestants in another leather contest without thinking of that image!
without seeing him in diapers.
Militia Etheridge.
That is a great joke.