Let's be very clear about what this court case really means. If DOMA is overturned by the Supreme Court, it does NOT mandate same-sex marriage nationwide, so you don't need to get all bothered about that. It simply says that couples who are legally married in states where it is legal cannot be denied federal benefits. DOMA singles out gay couples for unequal treatment, so it is clearly unconstitutional. Every other kind of marriage is recognized under Soscial Sercurity rules, immigration law, tax law, and for military and veterans' benefits. Interracial marriages are not excluded. Marriages performed in other countries are not excluded. Even common law marriages in states that have such a status are not excluded. Excluding gays is...

Why wasn't the Times writing about John Kerry's wealthy lifestyle when he was running -- or Kennedy's? To the Times, having weatlth only makes you out of touch with commoners if you're a Republican.

Did you not take note of the estimate that 70 percent of those are LEGALLY married? That does imply GOVERNMENT, does it not?

If Ms. Hick is going to count EVERYONE who gets a government benefit, such as Social Security and Medicare, then she should also count everyone who benefits from a farm subsidy, a Pell Grant or any of a 100 other government programs. You could get from 49 percent to almost 100 percent pretty fast.

Social Security shouldn't be counted in this figure. It's something we spent a lifetime working for -- not a government "benefit." As for Medicare, I paid into it for 40 years before being covered by it. I'm still working so I STILL pay into it, and they deduct from my Social Security check for Medicare parts B and D. Don't you think if you told an insurance compay you would pay premiums for 40 years before you received coverage and would continue to pay after that you could have a Cadillac health plan? The "experts" say we will take more from Medicare than we paid in -- but we paid starting with 1966 dollars, and I still believe if we had saved the money with compound interest we could pay for a Cadillac plan.

Kevvie, you're just pulling numbers out of your *ss again. The Census Burea says that 1 in 1,000 adults ALREADY report being in a same-sex marriage -- and not just one in a thousand gays, but one of EVERY thousand adults. They estimate that only 70 percent of those are actually in legal marriages -- the rest are cohabitations or civil unions -- but your assertion that committed gay couples don't really want to be married is getting tiresome, And it's not even CLOSE to being true.

The organizations on the SPLC’s list of hate groups are not there simply because of their religious beliefs about homosexuality or gay marriage. They make the list by spreading false and ugly propaganda about the gay community -- that most homosexuals are pedophiles, that they are are mentally ill and alcoholic, that they have thousands of sex partners and all the rest of that BS that finds its way into Townhall forums. The anti-gay groups with "family" in their names make the list because they are a danger to families headed by gays or that have gay offspring. They are “pro-family” in the same way that that the KKK is “pro-white” and the Nazi Party was “pro-Aryan.” It is not OK to love someone if it requires that you hate someone else.

Exactly. As Buckminster Fuller once said, ALL forms of waste are simply resources we are not using. In this case, we are taking "spent" fuel that still has 90 percent of its energy and treating it as waste. If we would recycle, as every other nuke country does, we would not need such a large underground repository. The problem our country has with recyclilng is that it produces plutonium as a byproduct -- also useful, but something that gives people nightmares about proliferation. In fact, every single media article that mentions plutonium calls it "the deadliest substance on earth," which is nonsense. People have been handling it safely for 60 years.

The best thing we could do for them is to make higher education affordable again. I believe technology is the answer. We cling to an outmoded model for education in which students have to live on campus, sit in classrooms and buy harcover books. They should be able to take classes online and get their books by downloading them. The conventional wisdom is that kids need the individual attention, but they're not getting that in classrooms anyway. They're sitting in lecture halls with150 students, and if that's the way they're being taught, isn't it just as easy to teach 150,000 online?

Now a 30-year process must start over somewhere else, while spent nuclear fuel is stored the same way it was stored at Fukushima -- in pools of water -- at every nuclear power plant in the country. The workforce has scattered, the momentum has been lost, and nuclear waste is stranded all over the country. Other countries reprocess their spent fuel, while we treat it as waste and dicard 90 percent of its energy. Reprocessing would also reduce the amount of waste to a tiny fraction. The U.S. doesn't reprocess because of nuclear proliferation concerns. So we produce WAY more waste than other countries and now do not have a permanent place to put it. It's insanity -- and it is NOT good science, just politics.