<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;charset=Windows-1252>
<STYLE>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6001.18148" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY class=hmmessage id=MailContainerBody
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
bgColor=#ffffff leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Sorry, I mistook your comment for that of
someone who pondered life's great questions in the 60's tradition, rather than
the hormone driven sexual fantasies of a 20 year old.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT><FONT
face="Times New Roman"></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=idahotom@hotmail.com
href="mailto:idahotom@hotmail.com">Tom Hansen</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Monday, November 24, 2008 11:31 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=editor@lataheagle.com
href="mailto:editor@lataheagle.com">Kai Eiselein</A> ; <A
title=scooterd408@hotmail.com
href="mailto:scooterd408@hotmail.com">scooterd408@hotmail.com</A> ; <A
title=josephc@wsu.edu href="mailto:josephc@wsu.edu">Joe Campbell</A> ; <A
title=kjajmix1@msn.com href="mailto:kjajmix1@msn.com">Keely Emerinemix</A> ; <A
title="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">Vision 2020</A> ; <A
title="mailto:thansen@moscow.com CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">thansen@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> RE: [Vision2020] California Supreme Court to Take Up Gay
Marriage</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>PARDON ME, Mr. Eiselein?<BR> <BR>Tom Hansen<BR>Moscow,
Idaho<BR><BR><BR>
<HR id=stopSpelling>
<BR>From: <A
href="mailto:editor@lataheagle.com">editor@lataheagle.com</A><BR>To: <A
href="mailto:idahotom@hotmail.com">idahotom@hotmail.com</A>; <A
href="mailto:scooterd408@hotmail.com">scooterd408@hotmail.com</A>; <A
href="mailto:josephc@wsu.edu">josephc@wsu.edu</A>; <A
href="mailto:kjajmix1@msn.com">kjajmix1@msn.com</A>; <A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A>; <A
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">thansen@moscow.com</A><BR>Date: Mon, 24 Nov
2008 11:18:45 -0800<BR>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] California Supreme Court to
Take Up Gay Marriage<BR><BR><BR>
<STYLE>
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.EC_hmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
</STYLE>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Tom, do you often have LSD
flashbacks?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=idahotom@hotmail.com
href="mailto:idahotom@hotmail.com">Tom Hansen</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Monday, November 24, 2008 11:20 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A
title="mailto:editor@lataheagle.com CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:editor@lataheagle.com">editor@lataheagle.com</A> ; <A
title="mailto:scooterd408@hotmail.com CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:scooterd408@hotmail.com">scooterd408@hotmail.com</A> ; <A
title="mailto:josephc@wsu.edu CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:josephc@wsu.edu">josephc@wsu.edu</A> ; <A title=kjajmix1@msn.com
href="mailto:kjajmix1@msn.com">Keely Emerinemix</A> ; <A
title=vision2020@moscow.com href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">Vision 2020</A>
; <A title=thansen@moscow.com
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">thansen@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> RE: [Vision2020] California Supreme Court to Take Up Gay
Marriage</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Question, Visionaires -<BR> <BR>In a polygamous marriage,
are all spouses inter-married? In other words . . . Are not only the
husband married to his several wives, but are the several wives married to each
other?<BR> <BR>If so, then wouldn't a polygamous marriage consist of
(conceivably) multiple same-sex marriages?<BR> <BR>Hmmm.<BR> <BR>Tom
"lesbian trapped in a man's body" Hansen<BR>Moscow, Idaho<BR><BR><BR>
<HR id=EC_stopSpelling>
<BR>From: <A
href="mailto:editor@lataheagle.com">editor@lataheagle.com</A><BR>To: <A
href="mailto:scooterd408@hotmail.com">scooterd408@hotmail.com</A>; <A
href="mailto:josephc@wsu.edu">josephc@wsu.edu</A>; <A
href="mailto:kjajmix1@msn.com">kjajmix1@msn.com</A>; <A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A>; <A
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">thansen@moscow.com</A><BR>Date: Mon, 24 Nov
2008 10:52:10 -0800<BR>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] California Supreme Court to
Take Up Gay Marriage<BR><BR><BR>
<STYLE>
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.EC_hmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
</STYLE>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Scott,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">My take on interracial marriage? I was was in
an interracial marriage, my child is the product of the marriage. That pretty
much says it all.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Polygamy has been a cultural norm in many
parts of the world. And it does have some practical applications.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">For instance, in cultures where the male
population has been decimated, for whatever reason, it would make sense for
males to have multiple wives. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">So where would this apply in the U.S.? In
areas where the male population has been hammered by death and prison terms. The
number of eligible females to eligible males is completely out of whack. Why not
let stable, albeit larger ,family groups have a chance. Nothing else has
worked.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">To my knowledge, no state allows for marriage
between close relatives.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Doesn't California already allow for gays to
have benefits through domestic partnership laws? I believe it also applies
to hetero couples living together.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">It would make far more sense for the state to
administer those, than marriage. Leave marriage up to religious
organizations and domestic contracts to the state.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=scooterd408@hotmail.com
href="mailto:scooterd408@hotmail.com">Scott Dredge</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Friday, November 21, 2008 12:55 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=editor@lataheagle.com
href="mailto:editor@lataheagle.com">editor@lataheagle.com</A> ; <A
title="mailto:josephc@wsu.edu CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:josephc@wsu.edu">josephc@wsu.edu</A> ; <A
title="mailto:kjajmix1@msn.com CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:kjajmix1@msn.com">kjajmix1@msn.com</A> ; <A
title="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">viz</A> ; <A
title="mailto:thansen@moscow.com CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">thansen@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> RE: [Vision2020] California Supreme Court to Take Up Gay
Marriage</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Kai,<BR><BR>Here's my answer's to your questions and my questions
back to you...<BR><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt" size=2>> Do societies not
have the right to decide what is acceptable and what isn't?<BR>I don't know if
they have the right to decide, but they seem to have the power to enforce.
In terms of gay marriage bans, I look at past history to see how good / bad for
society previous marriage bans have been. In terms of bans on interracial
marriages, I see only negative effects on both individuals as well as society as
a whole. What's your take on interracial marriage bans? Good or
bad? If bad, why did these bans exist in the first place and are these the
same reasons why gay marriages are banned? I think so.<BR><BR></FONT>
<DIV><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt" size=2>> Why not make polygamy
legal?<BR>You tell me why not since you asked the question. Make your
case? Extending identical rights to same sex couples that married couples
are afforded neither helps not hinders the case for multiple marriages.
The rights already exist for married couples. How would you go about
extending these same rights for married couples to married groups of
people. You asked the question, so I'd like to hear if you have a coherent
logic process for extending married couples right to married groups. Good
luck.<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt" size=2>> Why not let brothers marry
sisters or first cousins marry first cousins? (Other than the inbreeding
issue)<BR>Are these marriages banned? If so, how? State
Constitutions across the country are being amended to strictly define marriage
as between one man and one woman. This would not preclude an adult brother
from marrying his adult sister or prevent adult first cousins from
marrying. If this is such a societal ill, than why has this not also been
included in these state constitutional marriage definition amendments. The
answer is that is not required since the only goal of these amendments is to
slam the door on gay marriage. For some reason unbeknownst to me,
incestial marriage is more societally acceptable than gay marriage. Please
explain that since again you brought it up.<BR><BR>> Why not just make an
amendment stating a marriage can be between ANY consenting adults? That would be
the best way, wouldn't it?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt" size=2>> I can just hear the champagne
corks popping as divorce lawyers celebrate the thought of multiple wives
divorcing a husband.<BR>I'm not sure what problem you're trying to solve here
Kai. At issue is that there are benefits (health, tax, property transfer,
rights of survivorship, etc.) that are granted to married couples. same
sex couples are denied those rights for no logical reason. Couples
benefits must have a positive effect on society otherwise why not just ban those
benefits altogether? And yet, when these same benefits that have a
positive effect for married couples are granted to same couples, this is deemed
as negative for society. Why? <BR><BR>-Scott<BR></FONT></DIV><BR><BR>
<HR id=EC_EC_stopSpelling>
From: editor@lataheagle.com<BR>To: josephc@wsu.edu; kjajmix1@msn.com;
vision2020@moscow.com; thansen@moscow.com<BR>Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:05:19
-0800<BR>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] California Supreme Court to Take Up Gay
Marriage<BR><BR>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Do societies not have the right to decide what is acceptable
and what isn't?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Why not make polygamy legal? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Why not let brothers marry sisters or first cousins marry
first cousins? (Other than the inbreeding issue) </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Why not just make an amendment stating a marriage can be
between ANY consenting adults? That would be the best way, wouldn't
it?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I can just hear the champagne corks popping as divorce lawyers
celebrate the thought of multiple wives divorcing a husband.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: rgb(245,245,245)">
<DIV><B>From:</B> <A title=josephc@wsu.edu href="mailto:josephc@wsu.edu">Joseph
Campbell</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, November 20, 2008 11:57 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=editor@lataheagle.com
href="mailto:editor@lataheagle.com">Kai Eiselein, Editor</A> ; <A
title=kjajmix1@msn.com href="mailto:kjajmix1@msn.com">kjajmix1@msn.com</A> ; <A
title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> ; <A
title=thansen@moscow.com href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">Tom Hansen</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] California Supreme Court to Take Up Gay
Marriage</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px">According to Wikipedia, “</SPAN></FONT><FONT
size=4><FONT face="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 13px"><B>Due process</B> (more fully <B>due process of
law</B>) is the principle that the government must respect all of the legal
rights that are owed to a person according to the <FONT color=#002bb8>law of the
land</FONT>, instead of respecting merely some or most of those legal rights.”
<BR><BR>Do you think that rights are better served by allowing the general
public to decide who has the right to speak, to vote, to wed? If to wed, then
why not to speak? Why shouldn’t the general public be allowed to determine
whether or not you have the right to speak?<BR><BR>I’m trying to bring the issue
home to something you might relate to personally. Something to engage your
empathetic imagination.<BR></SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT
face="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12px"><BR><BR>On
11/20/08 11:37 AM, "Kai Eiselein, Editor" <editor@lataheagle.com>
wrote:<BR><BR></SPAN></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE><FONT face="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px">I'm going to play Devil's advocate for a moment, and
to be clear I don't give a rip about gay marriage one way or another. Hey, if
if gay couples want to keep divorce lawyers in business by forking over
thousands of dollars in fees and spend months going to hearing after hearing
after hearing, well, welcome to the hetero world. Toss in a child or two and
becomes even more fun. <BR><I>...No State shall make or enforce any law which
shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the
equal protection of the laws."<BR></I>Doesn't a referendum come under "due
process"?<BR><BR>--------------------------------------------------<BR>From:
"Tom Hansen" <thansen@moscow.com><BR>Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008
11:16 AM<BR>To: <editor@lataheagle.com>; <kjajmix1@msn.com>;
<vision2020@moscow.com><BR>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] California Supreme
Court to Take Up Gay Marriage<BR><BR>>>From Article 6 of the US
Constitution -<BR>> <BR>> "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United
States which shall be made <BR>> in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties
made, or which shall be made, under <BR>> the Authority of the United
States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; <BR>> and the Judges in every
State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the <BR>> Constitution or Laws
of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."<BR>> <BR>>
-------------------<BR>> <BR>>>From the 14th Amendment to the US
Constitution -<BR>> <BR>> "All persons born or naturalized in the United
States, and subject to the <BR>> jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the
United States and of the State <BR>> wherein they reside. No State shall
make or enforce any law which shall <BR>> abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the United States; nor <BR>> shall any State
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without <BR>> due process
of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the <BR>> equal
protection of the laws."<BR>> <BR>>
-------------------------------------<BR>> <BR>> Now, which part of the
US Constitution are you struggling with, Kai?<BR>> <BR>> Tom
Hansen<BR>> Moscow,<BR>> Idaho<BR>> <BR>>
---------------------------------------------<BR>> This message was sent by
First Step Internet.<BR>>
<A
href="http://www.fsr.com/">http://www.fsr.com/</A><BR>> <BR>><BR>Kai
Eiselein<BR>Editor, Latah Eagle<BR><BR>
<HR align=center width="95%" SIZE=3>
</SPAN></FONT><FONT size=2><FONT face="Monaco, Courier New"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10px">=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR> <A
href="http://www.fsr.net/">http://www.fsr.net</A>
<BR> <A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR></SPAN></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT
size=2><FONT face="Monaco, Courier New"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10px"><BR></SPAN></FONT></FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Kai Eiselein<BR>Editor, Latah Eagle</FONT></DIV><BR>
<HR>
Proud to be a PC? Show the world. Download the “I’m a PC” Messenger themepack
now. <A href="http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/119642558/direct/01/">Download
now.</A>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Kai Eiselein<BR>Editor, Latah
Eagle</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Kai Eiselein<BR>Editor, Latah
Eagle</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Kai Eiselein<BR>Editor, Latah
Eagle</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>