resurrectionsong

November 04, 2004

About Gay Marriage (Jerry)

Give the amount that I discussed the SSM issue, and the vehemence with which I discussed it, I should probably make some post-election comments. I know the results of the various ballot issues, including the one in my own state. I'm obviously deeply disappointed. I'm just not sure what I can say.

Posted by stumpjumper at November 4, 2004 11:48 AM

Comments

...ummmm, how about:
-there's a chance that this is more of a reaction to judicial activism than a reaction to homosexuality.
-in any case, tolerance toward homosexuality has come light-years in the last two decades, in that SSM wasn't really even on the agenda as recently as 3 years ago. The SSM just needs to back off a while, gather evidence of the stability-enhancing aspect of SSM, and re-introduce 5 to 10 years later.
-there's a darn good chance that a significant portion of the opposition was just that civil unions only became a national issue 5 years ago, and some people who might eventually be inclined to accept SSM merely want more time to see how the experiment goes in Europe, and how civil unions affect things in Vermont (that's where it was approved, right?).

Take heart! If it really is a civil rights issue, it will become obvious. If it really is a bad idea, that will become more obvious, too. Good ideas cannot be quashed, only delayed.

Posted by: Nathan at November 4, 2004 12:28 PM

All very good points and things that I will give a great deal of thought to.

Posted by: Jerry at November 4, 2004 12:31 PM

Nathan, I am opposed to SSM, but not to civil unions. I voted no to Amendment 3 here because of the added language saying that no other type of union would be legally recognized. That made me question whether common law marriages would be legally recognized. And, I do live in a state where the majority of people don't get married in a church, they get married in a temple. Living here has made me see the realities of allowing each man to worship or to follow the course of his conscience in regard to religion. In Idaho, Utah, and Arizona, the states most populated by LDS, the state has allowed for an hour a day for kids to leave campus for "religious instruction." Conveniently, the LDS have built "seminaries" right next to every high school. That just wouldn't fly in any other state and I would personally fight any measure to make this available in any state that I live in hereafter.

Oooh (red face)! Sorry to have altered the direction of the thread. Back to SSM....

However, Nathan, man! That was terrifically worded....very, umm, "civil" of you ;)

Posted by: Rae at November 4, 2004 06:22 PM