A homosexual federal judge in San Francisco ruled against California's Proposition 8. Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment passed by California voters and upheld as constitutional by California's Supreme Court, restricts marriage to one man and one woman. Now one man throw it out. It will be appealed and probably go to the U.S. Supreme Court. Up to this point, only judges and legislatures have favored homosexual "marriage". When given the chance to vote, the majority of the people oppose it. I wouldn't be surprised if government overruling of the will of the people eventually leads to the rocky disintegration of this country.
The state of Massachusetts has joined in a rear attack against the constitutional provision of the election of the President of the United States by electoral vote. Their governor signed a proposal (joining Hawaii, New Jersey, Maryland, Illinois and Washington) requiring that participating states commit their presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote (this would only take effect when enough states constituting more than half of the country’s electoral votes sign on to it). The Electoral College has served this country well since its founding. There are arguments pro & con, but the electoral system follows the original intent of presidents being elected by states rather than popular vote. It prevents candidates from just pitching their candidacies to the large population centers and at least tends toward promoting the idea of appealing to people in all states and regions of those states.
To me, one interesting sidelight of this is that the choice of Massachusetts' governing elite could easily circumvent the will of the citizens of their own state. Should they vote for the candidate who loses the popular vote nationwide, their electors would go to the candidate they opposed!