re: #220 londonistan calling

There is nothing other than malevolence towards gays that would motivate a rejection of the redefinition of one of the oldest social contracts? Are you sure? Could it possibly be that there are people who would like for gay couples to have all the legal rights of married couples, but still hold marriage out as the ideal? Equating same sex marriage to inter-racial marriage is a calumny.. there is not one iota of difference between a black human being and a white human being, but a world of difference between a man and a woman. My daughters spend 2 weeks every summer at a cottage of a lesbian couple that I love greatly, but I can have love for individuals without thinking that society has to be reordered to sanctify their union.

Malevolence towards gays can be with a smile. People who are casually against gay rights may actually simply not be informed as to what their political position really means. They may simply not be informed as to the rights that are denied to gay people.

Civil Unions are a step in the right direction, it’s the politics of incrementalism. If we have state civil unions, we miss the mor eimportant federal rigths granted to straight couples. If we have FEDERAL civil unions, we are almost there, and at that point it will simply be a matter of time before gay marriage is federally legal, IMHO.

Society is not reordered by giving gay spouses the right to visit each other when they are dying in a hospital, superseding the wishes of homophobic parents and family members. These rights are only conferred to married couples. Anyone who thinks gay couples should be denied this right is soulless and should just put the Klan robe on and be done with it.