<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Wednesday, February 25, 2004

Gay Marriage 

I guess I should say something more about this...

I've posted on it before when the Mass. SJC ruling came down, and I think that says just about all I want to say here, but I'll augment that for fun.

I'm trying to care more about this issue now that it is a culture war centerpiece intended to divide the country. I'm divided on the side of gay rights (surprise surprise). Why? It's about civil rights. I don't care about the institution of marriage and don't understand why it is so revered by those on the right who like to pretend it still really matters in a way that should give rise to the use of words like "revere" and "sanctity". I think the institution has been chewed up and spit out already and I don't get why people are wasting valuable fanaticism on a chunk of chewed up nonsense. Gay people, however, should have the same rights as straight people, and that extends to the rights of couples. So if you frame it like that, I'm for "gay marriage" even though I'm not really "for marriage" at all.

That might seem a little shaky, and I don't wanna come off like the Democrats on this issue with the whole split-the-baby "I'm against gay marriage, but for civil unions." I get what they're saying and I agree with them (I think that's the best solution). But the terms of the debate have been set, and compromise is no longer an option (the fault of both the courts and the executive, and a damn shame). Now it's just like abortion; you have to take sides or come off like a sleazy, pandering politician. You can't say, "I'm pro-life except when I'm pro-choice." And the same goes here.

So...I support gay marriage. Meanwhile, the only thing making me give a shit really is the insistance of cultural conservatives (read: religious zealots) on tinkering (read: mauling) our constitution to shove their values down the throats of the rest of the country.

The amendment is an abomination and should be squelched as such (and I think it will be). Even DeLay won't come out for it after Bush did, which says something.

Moral of the story? When Republicans can't run on their (feculent) record, they have a tendency to divide and conquer by harping on touchy social issues. Democrats do the same thing when they screw up. That's politics I guess, disgusting as it is. As for this particular tactic? I think it will backfire, with Bush losing more by alienating the Log-Cabiners and cheerleaders like Sully along with droves of socially moderate fiscal conservatives who really bought his whole "compassionate conservative" line back in 2000 than he is likely to gain by appeasing his base of far-right loons hellbent on hastening the apocalypse.

(edited for clarity and to remove stupidity)


|

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?