I find it hilarious that kitschikat and I have icons starring each other, and am bemused that people who have both of us on their list are going “WTF?!” right now.
I’ve been sending a link to this video to select friends via IM and LJ, this afternoon, and I thought that I might post it, too. It’s a very moving comment by the Mayor of San Diego about why he is reversing his original decision to veto a gay marriage amendment for his city.
He’s very frank and emotional about his reasons, and he’s stretching his political neck out by changing his mind. I hope some of my friends who’ve found themselves on the side of civil unions for gay people find their way to watching the video.
My own thoughts: I’m not at all against a religion choosing whether or not to vilify one thing or another; but if atheists can marry in the eyes of the government, so too should gay adults.
That is a very touching video. Thanks for sharing it!
I’m totally for gay marriage. If certain churches don’t want to perform it – fine. Churches can make that decision. Or, rather, “religious institutions” can. They already have rules about other things, so, if some decide they won’t perform same sex marriages, so be it.
But the government and the law have no right to deny these people the same protections. Or to stop a church/religious organization that is willing to perform the ceremony from doing it and making it just as legal binding.
Happily, it does seem we are moving towards a time where everyone, gay or straight, can be legally married and it’s equal for all. Hopefully it won’t take too long to get there.
I am all for full-blown marriage for gays, but I do think that the marriage-or-nothing crowd needs to back down a bit. Baby steps are better than nothing, and I think that too many people in this country are still much more comfortable with “nothing” than with turning over the sacred M-word to the gays.
I believe that gay marriage will be legal within this country in my lifetime, but we still have a ways to go before acceptance is universal enough to allow it. Civil unions may be a necessary evil on that path. We don’t have to like it, but we may have to tolerate it.
If I had my way, every government-recognized bonded relationship would be a civil union: gay, straight, whatever. Couples could then undergo a marriage ceremony in the church of their choosing. Everyone gets the same legal benefits, and religions with attitude problems can keep their marriages to themselves. I think the Dutch have a system along these lines.
This plan, of course, has roughly a snowball’s chance in hell of coming to fruition in America.
I think it would be best to have a redefinition of terms, yes. As you pointed out, though, I don’t see it happening.
I’m with you on that. State-sponsored unions should be a contract between individuals, no more and no less.
And I would LOVE to see more straight couples insist on civil unions in states that have ’em for gays.
The gays?
Something about that phrase throws a red flag in my head and screams about creating a false sense of “other”.
I was going for irony there… sorry if it didn’t quite come out that way.
We rule.
That is all.
Wow. I really admire him for following his heart and, so clearly struggling with the complex issues – not just the issues of civil unions vs. marriage, but the issue of betraying those that voted for him and the moral implications of the decision when weighed against the values he has supported over his career.
While I do respect him for his decision, I can’t say that I agree with his position. I support civil unions. I support them for people regardless of sexual orientation. I think that the government should get out of the marriage business and place it in the domain in which it belongs: the church. Yeah, this will never happen as long as the religious right has so much control over the government but, to me, it’s the sensible solution with the easiest social transition. I could go on and explain how this is the least discriminatory path and one that, I think, will actually serve to strengthen marriage and the church, but that is a conversation for another day.
(though, if we can’t have civil unions for all, marriage for all is a good second choice :))
Teach me to read all the replies before posting — we’re thinking along the same lines.
I find it hilarious that kitschikat and I have icons starring each other, and am bemused that people who have both of us on their list are going “WTF?!” right now.
Yeah, it stops me for a moment. Every single time.
And back-to-back? *laughs* You two rock, though.