@nandreetta: So you want Gizmodo to remove stars based on religious beliefs? ( I bring religious beliefs into it because that is the basis for most peoples' disapproval of same-sex marriages. I can't reasonably think of another basis...)

@pmbaustin: I never said what I was fine with. I dare say it's idiotic, ignorant, and self-absorbed to assume my desires based on my post. My beef is with the framing of the issue, not with the outcome.

@AimAtTheFace: To an extent, I agree with you. From a purely secular perspective, it makes sense to allow marriage to be between any two consenting adults. This would include incest, polygamy, etc. The objections people have against those practices are based in religion or unexplainable moral or cultural ideals as…

@DrBoom: That's a logically flawed example, the law prohibited seating arrangements, and had nothing to do with riding the bus. There is no inequality in the law when it applies to everyone the same. It may be argued it is an unjust law, but it is not unequal. The inequality arises from a difference in desire which…

@rev02: You'll notice I didn't say what what I thought the outcome should be, I just disagree with the framing of the question.

@Philip.J.Fry: "you're looking at it from within the context of your own values and beliefs". And you're not?

@Tbdsamman: You are talking about laws which excluded people. The current marriage laws don't exclude anyone. Any person can marry any opposite gender person. It's the same law for everyone, without respect to race, creed, color, religion, gender, etc. It's not there because it was meant to prevent anyone from…

@thePrototype: I for one don't see how there is any discrimination whatsoever. The law is exactly the same for everyone. It's not a question of rights, it's a question of what the legal definition of marriage is. Right now it is one man and one woman, and that definition is applied equally to all. The problem is…

@SouthernOracle: Your first example about allowing embryos from aborted babies is something that I think would be a great idea, if its abuse wasn;t inevitable. With sex obviously legal, and abortion legal, if we were to make it legal to use aborted fetus stem cells, we would have created a loop-hole to embryonic stem…

@Robotronic: Whiskey is a lot like hearing someone playing the violin. If it's done well, it's wonderful, but done poorly is absolute torture.

@SouthernOracle: Simple, because it's illegal to create the embryos for the use of stem cell harvesting, the ones being discarded were created for fertility reasons usually. If it is made legal to harvest embryonic stem cells, then embryos will be created by the truckload without there ever having been the intention…

Stem cells aren't a controversy, harvesting them from discarded human embryos is the controversy. Since these stem cells are harvested from the very same patient they are being used to treat, there is no controversy whatsoever.

As many have pointed out, you asked the wrong question.

Hulu, here's your answer:

@Dogen: Aren't there 14 episodes?

I love my Mini, but if it can do 120, that means 120 isn't impressive.

If there's anything I've learned from the global warming debate, it's that anyone who dissents from a scientific consensus is to be laughed at and deemed a lunatic.

@ZaxxonQ.com: Sounds like a fartsy film...

It seems like the bulk of the work is done, and having it work with other romance languages should be quick and easy to set up, especially Portuguese.

@CRAusmus: I don't know anything about their down jackets. I guess I got defensive because I own a TNF Apex jacket, and I absolutely love it. I have no experience with Patagonia, but I have seen their stuff, and think it looks quite nice.