This has been circling the internet for a few days now, but I don't believe it has hit Slog yet. NOM's newest video raises the most important question in the gay marriage battle yet: What will happen to our incredibly stupid children if gays are allowed to marry?

If you're keeping track, "If my dad married a man, who would be my mom?" is the new "opposite marriage."

(Via.)

It turns out that Larry Stickney, the state’s emerging guardian of marriage, has had some marital problems of his own. From my article in this week’s paper:

Anti-gay crusader Larry Stickney, whose organization, Protect Marriage Washington, filed a referendum on May 4 to repeal Washington State's domestic-partnership bill, wrote on his website that allowing gay marriage "will demolish the historical understanding and definition of marriage as that of uniting a man and a woman for life."

But Stickney himself—married three times and divorced twice—has not been united in marriage "for life." And, during his second marriage, his wife made serious allegations of domestic abuse.

Records from the Kitsap County Superior Court show that in 1994, Stickney's then-wife Cheryl alleged that he "badly injured" her twice, breaking her eardrum by hitting her in the ear. She also accused him of "[stealing] and destroy[ing] things belonging to my son and myself."

[Photo via Pam's House Blend]

In addition, Cheryl declared to the court, “This last time I thought my jaw was broken but it wasn’t. It, however, is still not adjusted right.”

Stickney, who didn't return calls seeking comment, retorted to the court that Cheryl was lying and attempting to make him “look like a real scoundrel.” He wrote that Cheryl “is very feminist in her outlook,” adding that she “lacks respect and is very rebellious towards me and refuses to give me the authority and support that I, as the father of our two small children, need to run a functional household.”

But despite empirical knowledge that traditional marriage is not synonymous with stable unions, Stickney contends on his website that the referendum is necessary because “happiness and well-being of both the parents and the children are best served by the family unit.”

But a Kitsap County judge in the mid-'90s thought the Stickney family was better off without Stickney in the picture. Despite his pleas, the judge issued a restraining order against him, granting Cheryl temporary custody of the two children and requiring Stickney to stay away from the family home. Several months later, Cheryl filed for divorce.

"People are human and people makes mistakes," says state Senator Ed Murray (D-43), sponsor of the domestic partnership bill. Indeed, embittered divorces are commonplace—even without gay marriages—but the portrait of Stickney illustrates a man who is on no position to claim moral high ground against the sanctity of anyone else’s marriage. Taken together as a group, Protect Marriage Washington, including state Representative Matt Shea and Gary Randall, are hypocritical ship of crusaders.

“I wouldn’t necessarily pry into anyone else's life," says Murray, "but they have invited it.”

Bad news out of New Hampshire:

New Hampshire lawmakers unexpectedly rejected a bill on Wednesday that would have made the state the sixth in the United States to authorize gay marriage.

The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives voted down the bill in a 188-186 vote, hours after its Senate approved the legislation 14-10 along party lines.... Both chambers had been asked to approve language that would give religious institutions opposed to gay marriage legal protections.

No word yet on why the NH house voted down the additional language that the governor requested. , Governor Lynch pledged to sign the bill if specific language protecting religious groups—language that duplicated already-existing protections—was added to the bill. There was no reason for the house to reject this bill based on the governor's request. This development is mystifying.

UPDATE: But marriage equality is not yet dead in New Hampshire...

A divided New Hampshire House has refused to go along with changes the governor demanded to make his state the sixth to allow gay marriage. Instead, it voted to further negotiate with the Senate.... Opponents tried to kill the bill, but failed. The House then voted 207-168 to ask the Senate to negotiate a compromise.

From Towleroad:

Confidential sources close to San Francisco City Hall told Towleroad's Corey Johnson that the California Supreme Court was prepared to release its opinion on Proposition 8 tomorrow, but decided to delay the ruling after a call from Mayor Gavin Newsom.

"Newsom reached out to the Supreme Court and asked them to hold off releasing their decision so it did not coincide with the White Night riots," said our source.

Thursday is the 30th anniversary of the White Night riots. The riot took place after a jury convicted Harvey Milk's murderer, Dan White, of voluntary manslaughter, not first-degree murder, in the assassination of Milk and SF's mayor George Moscone. When word got out that White has been sentenced to just seven years in prison—and could be out in just five—the city's gay community exploded. More here on the riots, the original "No More Mr. Nice Gay" uprising.

If it's true that Newsom asked the CA Supremes to delay their decision for this reason... well, it looks like Newsom believes there's a good chance that the decision will come down against marriage equality and he's worried about a repeat of the White Night riots.