With the election all done and wrapped up, it would seem that there is nothing left to talk about. Oh sure, I could ask when the oceans will actually start receding, if we being counting from the moment of election or if oceanic recession doesn't begin until The One actually takes office, but that would be too easy.

Instead, let's discuss the thing that has seemed to create the most ripples across the board, more so then even even the presidential election. Of course I'm talking about the passing by significant margin of California's Proposition 8.

The road to Prop. 8 was a bumpy one. A few years ago, a proposition to define marriage as man and woman was brought before the state of California and was passed by a significant margin, over sixty percent yes. In May of this year, the California Supreme Court overturned the vote by a 4-3 margin saying that, and I'm paraphrasing, that everyone deserves equal rights under the law to marry whom they choose.

So, the sixty percent, though beaten and bloodied, refused to give up and drafted a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as one man and one woman and began petitioning to get it put on the ballot for this last November. That done, the people of California voted for the amendment that would define marriage as one man and one woman only, not allowing for homosexual or same-sex marriages.

Notice something. I said that prop. 8 would not allow for homosexual marriages, but I said nothing about homosexual unions.

Why is this such an important distinction? Because California Family Code 297.5 says, and I quote, “Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.”

Let me sum that up: Under California law, as of June 30, 2005, same sex unions have The Exact Same Rights that heterosexual marriages have by the definition of the law. There is no question of equality. There is no 'right' that his being removed. The argument that Prop. 8 takes away the rights of same-sex couples is completely and utterly wrong. It's wrong by the definition set up within California law which grants those rights without question.

This is not discrimination, this is delineation. It's making the clear the difference between these two things.

Let me be clear – I'm not saying in this column that same-sex couples cannot feel love, nor am I saying that they aren't as satisfying or share the same closeness as heterosexual couples, but what I am saying is that there is a prima fasci (def: On the face of it) difference between a homosexual union and a heterosexual marriage that needs to be defined in the law. History tell us and that the basis for any civilization is the family – father, mother, kids (multiple) and it is through this medium that the values of a civilization are passed from one generation to another, ensuring the continuation of that civilization.

Finally, let me point out that since the election, conservatives have been expected to accept the outcome of the Presidential race (and rightly so) and the outcome of the abortion ban here in South Dakota (also, rightly so), but we are not seeing, at all, any call for homosexual activists to do the same in regards to this vote. Ladies and gentlemen, when one group is expected to shut up and fall into line while the other is given free reign to scream, shout, defame religions, disrupt services, act in crude and

lascivious ways deliberately, and threaten to get their way or no way, you really need to wonder – do they really mean 'equality for all' or are they really looking to give 'equality' to those who think exactly like them?

Is that really equality?