jim had this comment about the previous post:

"The Constitution is supposed to give people rights not take them away. This whole issue is just ridiculous. The people against it just sound completely ignorant and stupid. Are any of the presidential candidates for allowing gay marriage? As far as I know they are all for the civil union and the banning of "gay marriage".
Georgie has gots to go."

i originally replied in the comments, but wanted to put it on here.

first off, the only real candidates at this point are really kerry and bush, and we know how bush feels.
kerry is against gay marriage, but for civil unions. he is also rightly calling out the president for using our constitution for political gain. you know if it wasn't this, it would be abortion, or pledging alliegance to god, or some other fucking wedge issue that helps to avoid the things that bush has tanked, like jobs and the economy.

the issue people seem to be overlooking here is that a few short months ago, it was still a big deal that dean had made civil unions legal in vermont! now everyone is for civil unions and against gay marriage. so when the dust settles, it looks to me that either way the homosexual community will have taken a huge step forward. if all states recognize civil unions, then this whole brouhaha will have been pretty damn sucessful. i applaud the mayors of these cities that are basically organizing enormous acts of civil disobedience and honestly putting their careers at stake to shed light on a major flaw in the laws of our land.

i would hope that the few people reading this, married or no, recognize the fact that a couple in love, whatever combination of men or women, should be granted equal rights. now, for fucks sake. and i'm not talking about polygamy or bestiality. if the law grants two people certain rights when they enter into an agreement, it should extend those rights to all. arguing that the next step is bestiality or polygamy is like arguing that dogs should be able to get drivers licences, or that three people should hold the office of president at once. many of the religious right argue that one of the main reasons for marriage is procreation, the survival of the species. if thats the case, then why are they against polygamy? better odds there. but i digress...

personally, i think the only way to ever solve this issue, and its something that will never happen in our lifetime, or our childrens childrens lifetime for that matter, is to do away with marriage as a state institution altogether. a couple enters into a civil union of the state, and is then given all the rights any married couple today has. you can then get married by a pedop...priest in a church on sunday, or by a druid in the woods on the vernal equinox. you are granted the right to celebrate or consummate your civil union in any way you or your religion sees fit, and it does not affect the rights your civil union has afforded you. i dont mean to sound like im against marriage at all, im just against discrimination.

it's all just so frustrating.

separation of church and state. equal rights. now.

please?

posted by scott 8:36 AM