http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5293-2003Nov21.htmlAnother look at the gay marriage issue, from a legal history point of view that I think’s intresting and important. Taking this kind of perspective it’s beliveable that Renquist might vote against defense of marriage acts. To be quite frank, the notion of “state’s rights” is foolish to me. State’s aren’t due anything more than administrative responsibilites, but at the same time states rights fil some sort of neccessary niche, and I’m not sure I can think of a way to avoid the problem entirely.