Parroting the FAQ shows bad conscience. Obviously it is not a complete account.<p>I am absolutely right about stuff that was inside the non-disclosure firewall and none of your business -- good to read you acknowledge that (finally!).<p>If we don&#x27;t agree on rights, duties, definitions or reasons for long-standing laws, there is no point in arguing. Socrates said something like that. But for the record you are woefully ignorant of California law and its recent history, in particular D.P. law and why it was passed and amended. Anyway, no marriage was in limbo, as then-AG Brown stated in mid-2008 what every first-year law student knows: ex-post facto laws are unconstitutional.<p>If it&#x27;s all about feelings, there&#x27;s no point in arguing. My stance, along with that of ~7M others, hurt your feelings, and I&#x27;m the proxy for all those voters (many of whom have not changed their views). So be it.<p>Finally, I never wrote anything about &quot;intolerant of intolerance&quot;, of course. But I am enjoying your whinging about JavaScript. Ta!