W ay to go, Louisiana. You did it again. From the same state that brought you Edwin Edwards and David Duke comes the latest installment in our state's historical reputation of smooth moves.

Saturday, voters swarmed the polls to express their heartfelt disagreement with same-sex marriage. It seems like we should be getting more open-minded as a country. Not less.

Headlines trumpeted the results of the vote across the state this morning, bearing cold hard truths in statistics.

The bill was supported by a 78 percent vote. Only in New Orleans was the race even close, being the only precinct in the state with a politically strong gay constituency, and even there it passed by a slim margin.

Christian conservatives have been lobbying in overdrive over the past few months, also no surprise to this writer. The grassroots, pulpit-based campaign against opening the interpretation of the definition of marriage up a little bit has succeeded. At least for the time being, anyway.

The civil rights group Forum for Equality has also done a little legwork, sending us at The Tech Talk a little information packet about the amendment and their stance.

At least the people of our fair state were given the opportunity to decide and to voice their opinions, no matter how insignificant the 22 percent of voters who voted against the adoption of this amendment may now seem.

Similar amendments to ban same-sex marriage are on ballots in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon and Utah.

The next step for the Forum is to follow through with their legal options and not let the issue fall flat.

John Rawls, a lawyer for the Forum for Equality, feels the disappointment of his clients. He was quoted on CNN saying something that made me laugh.

"I'm disappointed so many Louisianians either did not read the amendment or are so afraid of gays that they voted for this amendment anyway."

Fear is, I'm sure, the motivation of the whole propagandized man-and-woman outlook on the marriage pact.

What exactly that fear really amounts to isn't clear; it seems rather paranoid. Letting homosexual couples enjoy the rights of the marriage pact would not devalue the institution in itself, and to say so is to admit to stereotyped prejudice against homosexuals.

I'm a little disappointed in my fellow man right now. We already have a law on the books that marriage is a man and a woman, and in the paranoia whipped up by propaganda against gay marriage, amending the constitution wasn't far away, I guess.

Out-of-state marriages aren't going to be recognized here, either. Gay rights activists are saying the amendment will deprive both gay and straight unmarried couples of the right to enter into certain contracts and own property jointly.

Supporters of the amendment are saying pish-posh. LSU law professor Katherine Spaht said to CNN the amendment doesn't touch property rights.

Who do we believe; what exactly have the voters of Louisiana done in their fear? We don't know yet, but both sides realize at this point that the courts are going to be deciding, that's for sure.

Whatever the outcome, we haven't heard the last of this.

Nick Todaro is a senior journalism from Shreveport and serves as managing editor for The Tech Tech Talk. E-mail comments to nst005@latech.edu.