Thanks Charltuna for posting that message about the anti-gay marriage movement. Ed and I have been California Domestic Partners since the partnership law was created, and that means that in January we will have most of the California State rights and responsibilities of marriage. But of course we will still lack the 1024 rights and protections converred by the Federal government on married couples, including Social Security survivorship.
There was a very important quote in that article that I think is the key to the whole crusade to ban gay marriage. Here it is:
"We saw a stepped program, a plan by gay advocates," Mr. Burress recalled. "It would lead to homosexuality being taught in schools as equal to heterosexuality. And we saw that what they couldn't get from legislatures they would try to get by going to court."
We hear a lot about "protecting marriage". Many on this board have openly laughed at the idea, and asked out loud how gay people marrying could hurt anyone else's marriage, and I agree with them. Nobody's marriage is hurt by gay people embracing the concept. But in my opinion protecting marriage was never the issue for those pushing to ban gay marriage. The real issue is status. Mr. Burress worries that homosexuality will be seen as equal to heterosexuality. His view could be summed up in this way: "These gay people want to be seen as equal to us, and we're just not going to have it." The same issue was deeply imbedded in the race struggle. People guard their social status very jealously, especially the insecure.
