That's exactly the situation in Quebec - civil unions are the only legal thing (and gay as well as hetero couples are eligible), and any religious or other kind of marriage ceremony people want they are free to do on their own.

But this doesn't address Jim's objection. It removes marriage from the legal definition and turns it over to people to make of it whatever they want. Fine by me - but not for the Marriage Defenders.

I think you're right - pro-choice people are the majority. It's a minority of people that yell about abortion - and I bet even a lot of them, in the privacy of the voting booth, would vote FOR a pro-choice candidate due to personal experiences.

The other thing is that Obama still has the money ROLLING in. That indicates a whole lot of people who plan to get out and vote for him.

I think (I hope - even, dare I say, pray) that the noise we hear is from a noisy minority.

But Warren has in effect endorsed McCain - or at least said implicitly that he could never back Obama because he couldn't support any candidate that wasn't totally anti-abortion.

For those who talk about Warren as mendacious - he claims not to be the money-grubbing maniac that many televangelists are. (Not that he expresses it that way, of course.) He says he gives back 90% of what he earns, including from his best-selling book. But what does he give it back to and how is it used by the recipients? I know someone once who wanted to start a church and take a vow of poverty - upon which their quite substantial salary (from a non-related job) would be 'given' to the church...but the church would pay all their expenses and provide an allowance, etc. The ploy was that - since they headed the church and directed what it did with the money - they would have their salary just as usual, but wouldn't have to pay income tax. I dunno - I just mistrust these evangelical mega-church blowhards so much that I'd like to read some investigation of the 90% give-away thing.

"We need a big televised forum where the candidates have to discuss scientific issues. Just a dream..."

That's above their pay-scale.

If Jindal were McCain's VP, and they got elected (shudder), Jindal could just exorcise away all these demons that beset us. OUT OUT PUTIN! OUT OUT BIN LADEN! IN YOUR PLACE CHINA! Not seeing any other way, maybe it's worth a try. (JUST KIDDING)

Right on!

And add to Timbuktom's list, the majority of the population seems to be in favor of choice in the matter of abortion.

And more and more, most straights don't give a hoot about gays. (Let 'em loose from their closets and....well, nothing. They live their lives, other people live theirs, big deal.)

My own reaction to the broadcast - how can anybody not be repulsed by the smarmy preacher-man and the idiotic candidate ("I'll get Bin Laden, yes I will, blah blah") and not be impressed by the thoughtful intelligent candidate. I want someone who'll THINK about things rather than someone who shouts slogans and may well act in the same way.

But then, sigh, I don't understand a lot of things in this world.

"...mega-ego large enough to block out the sun, even in CA." Good one!

Why on earth do people feed the Warrens of this world with money and adulation? Or cheer on a creature like McCain is (or has become, or is playing on TV)?

Or "follow" "Jesus"? (Some poster on another thread said he says, "Thank you Jesus" a whole lot - to the pizza guy.)

Speaking of people named Jesus - this may be one of the last elections in which the reclaiming of America by the original inhabitants can be ignored. Bad news, tho - many of those reclaimers are Catholic or Evangelical (of the poorer variety).

Agree with you.

And yet, and yet - there was a fuss for a while about the Obama house, a modest(ish) l and half million or whatever it was.

But 10 houses? Yeah, maybe McCain came by them "honestly" - but somewhat creepily, by way of his wife. Did McCain earn gazillions of dollars and buy those piles?

And who needs ten houses? I'd say, if you're rollin' in it, maybe two - a vacation home somewhere as well as your main house. Otherwise, stay at a hotel! (I'd prefer a rental to a vacation home anyway, less trouble.)

I think this should get some play. Ten houses should turn off middle and low-income voters. That and his disdain for taxation - like, let's have more bridges fall down and more veterans not get proper care...

Wow. Maybe a sense of proportion is called for.

Also, for people who think Salon is out to destroy Obama, or whatever - how many people read this site? Enough to sway the election? I doubt it. Anyway, judging by the letter-writers here, everyone has their mind made up already.

"Good people think before they answer. Evil people have a quick reply, but it causes trouble.(from Proverbs)

Maybe someone could ask Rev. Warren about that?"

Wow! One can find a biblical quote that fits almost any situation - but this one is deadly!

And, since the candidates were asked about evil, I found McCain's statements to be evil. (Obama, to his credit, had something to say about good intentions causing evil...and smarmy preacher-man even agreed with him).

While I would have been thrilled at the idea of a woman prez, I think for the U.S. having a black one is more of a sea-change in the American psyche. But, bottom line, it is more important what the prez is as a person and what s/he does. And, for this election, the bottom-bottom line is GET THE DAMN REPUBLICANS OUT.