Same with me for my first marriage and that's what everyone I knew did. I went back to my maiden name after. When I got married again, I wanted to keep my whole name A B C D. I had to argue a bit with the clerk because A C D was what she always did, but I have all four names now.

Been in the deep nearly 50 years, I've never thought of it as subservient. It's semi-formal. Formal is Mrs. Lastname, but that is too formal for people you see regularly. One step down is Mrs./Miss Firstname (though we just say Miss, as it is never written.). Once you are an adult, most people go to just Firstname, though I still call some of my mom's friends Miss Firstname. A common exchange with a young person here: Mrs. Lastname, ..... Oh hon, you can call me Firstname OK, Miss Firstname, It's like they just don't feel comfortable going that informal. By the way, it goes for men, too, around here. Dh is Mr. Firstname to all the kids here. That's just how parents introduce him to their kids.

And the prof probably meant sophomore "standing" which is just related to the number of credit hours she has.

Think of it as taking the long view. You are not voting for gay marriage; you are voting for separation of church and state. It is the only thing that will allow your religion to continue and flourish as the population changes. Have you ever thought that those taking the short view by insisting that religion become part of our law will be bringing on the thing they most fear? Maybe acting and voting Biblically IS keeping your religion separate. Seems like Christ alluded to that several times.

xkcd did a nice graph of this: http://xkcd.com/1431/ (It's not updated to 2015 where the solid blue line would now be at the 100% mark.) In researching this I found it rather depressing that only 87% of Americans approve of interracial marriage as of 2013. And from what I can find only 8-9% of American marriages are interracial (though that may be comforting for those who are concerned that the country will shortly be overrun with gay-married people. I have trouble following the logic involved.)

I think the majority of Americans do support it now, and support is growing (particularly considering it is mostly older people who object). http://www.pewforum.org/2015/07/29/graphics-slideshow-changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/ http://www.gallup.com/poll/117328/marriage.aspx It's similar to how the approval rating rose for interracial marriages: http://www.gallup.com/poll/163697/approve-marriage-blacks-whites.aspx

Isn't that exactly what we are doing? You can have a marriage like your great-grandma, I can have my more modern marriage, and my neighbors (both male) can have their marriage. Everyone gets the marriage that they want and goes on. The reason we object to people like Kim Davis is that she wants to have the marriage that she wants AND wants to force everyone else to have a marriage just like hers. I think most of us are responding and not attacking. The nice people asking for marriage licenses in Kentucky WERE minding their own business- the business of applying for a marriage license. (They became somewhat defensive when told they were perverts and didn't deserve one.)

Back to some comparisons made earlier. An article showed up this morning about a Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol: http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/05/travel/muslim-flight-attendant-feat/index.html It is different because she made arrangements for another attendant to do the serving rather than refusing to let anyone on the plane do so (and I'm pretty sure she didn't insult the passengers who ordered alcohol.) It will be interesting to see how a wide variety of these cases play out in court (and if the staunch supporters of Davis fall on the same side when it is applied to everyone's beliefs and not just theirs).

Can't like this because it is too sad, but thank you for sharing. It is beautifully written and expressing the heart of the issue. Basic human rights should be available to all humans.

Thanks for the link; I hadn't ever read that. Though long and circuitous, it was worth the read. I've definitely heard echoes of the ideas from old Southerners, and can now see the sermons that gave them such strong opinions. He created a very compelling Biblical argument for them, though for most of our generation, the holes in the logic are huge. Hopefully, someday my grandkids will look back on today's sermons with similar perspective.

I like this example. There may be some way to accommodate his religious practice (e.g. four ten hour days, if there are others in the office to work Friday), but to make the example comparable to Davis, he would have to insist that not only "he" be off, but the entire office be closed (even if the others don't share his faith), because it is offensive to his faith to even leave the office opened at a holy time.

I heard an interview yesterday with the young boy's uncle (who lives in Canada). Absolutely heart-breaking (as in bawling in the car in the driveway), but it really helped me understand how hard it is to get help before tragedy strikes. He talks about what they tried through legal routes to get the family out: http://www.npr.org/2015/09/04/437597010/for-family-of-drowned-syrian-boy-there-was-no-other-hope-uncle-says

Go ahead and pick it up and wean off it...every other day, every third day, and so on. (Unless the doc tells you otherwise.) It's the opposite than what one would think, but cold turkey can make the withdrawal symptoms last months, weaning off gradually can shorten it to weeks. (I was put on an SSRI before they realized I had Grave's; since it wasn't needed, it was an abrupt cessation. In the months after, I read lots and learned that was a huge mistake.)

I'm not personally affected by the issue. I guess I just believe in equal rights for all and I can't see any way that gay marriage infringes on others' rights as long as we aren't forcing them to get gay-married (Does anyone else think that is the most absurd word/phrase?) People have been required by our gov't to serve groups they don't like, don't agree with, or downright hate since the civil rights era, if not longer. That's not new to me. But the bigger picture is that I don't want to live in a theocracy, particularly not with the angry brand of religion that surrounds me. I guess I might find some religion that I was OK with, but I really think our government should continue with separation of church and state from the founding documents and remain religiously neutral. This issue is exclusively religious...a certain group of people have been denied their rights because of religion, the country has been called on it, and it is slowly bestowing full rights on them.

The penalty for theft/shooting/beating is often jail. The penalty for issuing (in one case) or not issuing (in the other) is not usually jail. That's why neither one of them was arrested when they first made their statements by issuing or not issuing. After the courts ruled, the mayor complied and the clerk refused, finding herself in contempt of court, which is a jailable offense.

Love it. I think some of the early theory might also be able to explain the introduction of bagpipes into battle. (JK - My dad is a piper and I do really love them.)

It seems like the judge is offering her a pretty sweet choice now. All she has to do is not interfere with the clerks who have agreed to sign the license. So she can keep her 80k job and only do the parts she wants. ALL she has to do is NOT stop the people who have agreed to pick up the slack.

It does at least seem like something she should have thought about before she took the oath of office: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/oath-court-clerk-now-jailed-gay-marriage-33516278

Since the law requires that the marriage license come from the clerk, I imagine they won't be legal if her name isn't on it. I'm guessing the reason the judge was waiting for the courts, and not finding a work-around, is that he was concerned that any licenses issued under different circumstances would be legally invalid.

I'm sure the judge wants this over with. If she said she changed her mind and wants to resign, he would just drop the contempt charges. In order to get the press, she has engineered the situation such that the only option the judge has (to keep the gov't functions running) is to send her to jail. He can't legally remove her from office; as long as she is at the office, no one can issue marriage certificates.

I believe resigning was the first most obvious solution, but she and her lawyers had already made it clear that she refuses to do that. The judge doesn't have the option to remove her from office, but she has the option to quit at any time. The law would be upheld and her personal conscience safe if she just left her job.

If it's going to be very long, look at a knee walker: http://kneewalkercentral.com I'm sure I'm heavier than your dd (and older), but crutches caused a problem with my shoulders (not a problem a cellist needs!) I was able to rent a knee walker (some other brand) at a full service pharmacy next to the hospital, and it helped so much. I'd crutch to the trunk, pull it out, and go. As long as campus is wheelchair accessible she should be good. Fortunately it was my left ankle, and I drive an automatic.

Some insight into the sibling question http://www.today.com/health/firstborn-girl-scientists-find-one-unexpected-disadvantage-t40921

Can it just be used as syrup? Maybe over pancakes or waffles? Or you could put it in the batter.

This introvert just about broke out in hives reading about such a horrible idea (but obviously we are not all the same.)