Yes, it started with the court but you might recall we had to endure a very long and drawn out process in the legislature, in which we lost the first round, to keep a vote off the ballot.

We called, we wrote, we had interviews with our reps, I was on the radio and met with straight couples that were confused.

We watched the hateful and illegal RCC put children on buses carrying hate signs. We watched nuns hugging and crying when they lost.

WE FOUGHT FOR THIS RIGHT and dammit we keep fighting for it in other states.

Shame on you for thinking this wasn’t hard fought. If you want these same rights get ready to fight hard and stop whining.

A veto by a governor FOR gay marriage could well be seen as upholding a civil rights issue, or a constitutional issue as we have just seen in Iowa over a legislature bent on discrimination regardless of the law. A veto by Vermonts Governor would be an abuse of the power he was ebtrusted to uphold for his own personal gain.

So is he angling for a Congressional seat? Clearly he thinks his veto is worth something, and this is looking more and more like self-interest than any real moral indignation, so what does he think the GOP will do for him?

Furthermore, I don’t believe that the veto is meant primarily for budget/spending bills, etc. That power rests in the hand of the executive as a check on any “whims” of the populace (i.e. the legislature), etc, and to go with his or her vision.

I couldn’t disagree with him more about his veto threat, but I feel that the voters can elect a better candidate or let’s just hope the House can muster an extra 5 votes!

It’s just that the legislature has the power to override that veto, and that veto power of the executive may also come to our community’s aid in the future in some instances (e.g. Gov Paterson of New York). I just wish there were more governors who favored our side!

Let’s hope for a 2/3 majority!

The legislature has the opportunity to override his veto and it’s up to the representatives to lobby for enough votes to override.

Its not the first time in US history that a president or govenor vetoes based on personal beliefs. This is an unfortunate part of the process.

To say that vetoes became an accepted practice during the Bush years is also false. Bill Clinton used his veto a lot more than GWB.

Govenor Douglas is just posturing for his Republican base and the national community. The last thing he wants is to be remembered as the Republican govenor that allowed same-sex marriage to pass under his watch.