Yesterday, homosexuals legally married for the first time in Massachusetts. Just like heterosexual marriage, views of how to get hitched vary from couple to couple:

Many of the couples who obtained marriage licenses paid a fee to waive the normal three-day waiting period, and exchanged vows as quickly as feasible. Ceremonies ranged from brisk city-hall procedures to elaborate church weddings, complete with champagne, cake and bridesmaids.

Naturally, not everyone could keep quiet, even for one day, to wait for the impact of the weddings on society.

"The sacred institution of marriage should not be redefined by a few activist judges," said President Bush, renewing his support for a proposed constitutional ban that has been introduced in Congress.

And...

"The documents being issued all across Massachusetts may say 'marriage license' at the top but they are really death certificates for the institution of marriage," said James Dobson, founder of the conservative Christian lobbying group Focus on the Family.

At least President Bush and Dr. Dobson acknowledge their agenda. Fox News offers a wink-wink, nudge-nudge approach. Consider this article posted on its site, specifically the stunning way it zigs from here:

Some of Canada's religious leaders are worried about the recent passage of a national law that makes it illegal to advocate violence against gays and lesbians.

to here:

The definition of marriage — and whether to include same-sex couples — is exactly what Canada's Supreme Court will examine this fall.

in 222 words.

While I believe the idea of a mass liberal bias in "The Media" is ludicrous, I accept that some institutions have that. It's even fine in the editorial departments of media outlets. But responding to perceived liberal bias with conservative bias is equally absurd. The only way to defeat such a bias is with unbiased reporting. Fox News didn't write such an article; that article doesn't even adhere to coherence. Its author had an agenda and a 225 word limit.

Now that same-sex marriage is legal, pontificating on the validity of the marriages in Massachusetts is a waste. Nothing will change until at least 2006. Even then, if an amendment to the Massachusetts constitution passes, I suspect that the courts will be loathe to reverse existing marriages over fears that invalidating marriages would do more to damage America than same-sex marriage could ever do. As for a federal amendment, public opinion has already revealed that such a drastic constitutional change has no consensus.

In closing, I offer proof that faith in the administration will pay off. It's inconceivable, but consider Bono's quote while giving the commencement speech at the University of Pennsylvania:

"The FCC has taught me a lesson," the 44-year-old rocker said Monday, referring to the Federal Communications Commission's declaration that an expletive he used on last year's Golden Globe Awards broadcast was indecent and profane.

God bless America.