the decision of SCOTUS to decline hearing out an argument to reverse the decision of lower courts to strike down bans on gay marriage as a pretty good thing. For one thing, as the court is currently constituted, I'd be worried about what kind of cartwheels they'd need to undertake to give "concerned people" the status to claim that allowing marriage equality harmed them in any way, and I'd really be shocked at seeing one of those "one-shot", not intended to act a precedent, rulings that manage to mangle things in favor of states banning gay marriage, without doing harm to the concept of states' rights. I think that, understanding that public opinion is changing on this issue rapidly, the court is probably in the right to let it go.
I'm not one to look a gift horse in the mouth. And I've got a little schadenfreude for the tizzy that some of the NOM (et als) folks are in at the moment. (Countdown to Brian Brown having to get a real job continues...) (Because what kind of a job, seriously, is being an activist against other people's personal lives? Seriously, you busybody--can you file? Type? Handy with a plunger?* Because working to deny other people basic rights is a shitty job to cling to.) And why, yes, why wouldn't the 14th amendment apply to gay people? Forget redefining marriage--I take a hell of a lot of issue with someone redefining "citizens" in a way that excludes queer identities.
More couples--more families--breathe a little easier and make the plans that were a long time coming. And I would call that progress.
(Yes, I know the man is highly educated. Cold. Ass. Stare.)