Ruben Navarrette: Foes of gay marriage want power, but not responsibility

San Diego Union Tribune via SacBee ^ | 10/20/8 | Ruben Navarrette

[SmithL]

You wouldn't have picked up on it during the debates, but John McCain and Barack Obama actually agree on some issues. One of them is gay marriage.

Both candidates oppose the concept, preferring instead the squishy alternative of civil unions.

They're both wrong. I can sympathize. In 2000, when 61 percent of California voters approved Proposition 22, a ballot measure that defined marriage as between a man and a woman, I opposed gay marriage. I felt gay-rights activists should concentrate on a more achievable goal such as a federal civil rights bill outlawing private-sector discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Then a gay family member helped me see that the issue wasn't as complicated as I was making it. I now believe we simply can't have a two-tiered system where some of us have the right to marry and others don't, based on sexual orientation. The fact that gays and lesbians – including some who are already in committed relationships – want to get married doesn't weaken the institution. It strengthens it by allowing more people to participate. As more states allow gays and lesbians to marry – Connecticut recently joined the list – I've noted that civilization hasn't crumbled.

In California, some people still worry it might.

Proposition 22 was struck down last spring by the California Supreme Court, thus clearing the way for gay marriages. Now the opponents of gay marriage have proposed another ballot initiative, Proposition 8, which would amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage.

McCain endorses the measure. But Obama's position is all over the map. Despite having said that he opposes same-sex marriage and that each state should reach its own decision, Obama has also said he opposes "divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution" in order to prohibit gay marriage.

[CounterCounterCulture]

Foes of gay marriage want power, but not responsibility

Wrong. Completely opposite.

federal civil rights bill outlawing private-sector discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Would that include religious organizations and anybody who exercises his/her conscience? First Amendment? What First Amendment? The Gaystapo doesn't believe in the First Amendment.

I now believe we simply can't have a two-tiered system where some of us have the right to marry and others don't, based on sexual orientation.

There is no two-tiered system. Homos have the same right to marry somebody of the opposite sex as heteros do. Homos don't have the rights to marry a close relative, and same goes for heteros. Etc.

The fact that gays and lesbians – including some who are already in committed relationships – want to get married doesn't weaken the institution. It strengthens it by allowing more people to participate. As more states allow gays and lesbians to marry – Connecticut recently joined the list – I've noted that civilization hasn't crumbled.

Look at nations that have legalized it. The institution has been weakened. And those who oppose the homosexual lifestyle are fined and/or put in prison. Religious persecution rises. Gaystapo tactics ruin civilizations.

[edge10]

Incorrect.

Zero wants to repeal the DOMA. Why would you want to do that if you weren’t in favor of gay marriage?

Look at Zero’s actions not his words!

[informavoracious]

Ok, so WE'RE being divisive. The CA Supreme Court was NOT being divisive when they overruled the will of the people. Dissension is divisive when it is from conservatives. Dissension is justified when it comes from liberals.

The societal destruction doesn't show up overnight. Same as with abortion. People did not embrace the culture of death overnight. But 35 years later, we are drowning in it.

[Pilated]

No same sex marriage. A marriage is between a MAN and WOMEN. If you want to live together fine! NO MARRIAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[goldstategop]

Its not a civil rights issue. Marriage isn't about making people feel good; its about raising the next generation of children. Its about adult responsibility. The proponents of same sex marriage will never get it.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Daveinyork]

Just in case you are weakening in your resolve to maintain marriage as only between a man and a woman, watch the commercial in which the guy loses a bet and marries a goat.

[weegee]

I now believe we simply can't have a two-tiered system where some of us have the right to marry and others don't, based on sexual orientation.

And what happens when a "legally" married couple moves to another state that does not recognize their marriage? And what happens when an employer or benefit provider does not reconize same sex partnerships?

So much for the argument that this is a "states' rights" issue. It would still maintain a two tiered system.

A constitutional amendment would absolutely take this out of the hands of activist judges.

[goldstategop]

Exactly. Our opponents cannot point to a single case where the people or their elected representatives voted to approve same sex marriage. In every case, it has been imposed by activist judges.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[WOSG]

“You wouldn’t have picked up on it during the debates, but John McCain and Barack Obama actually agree on some issues. One of them is gay marriage.

Both candidates oppose the concept, preferring instead the squishy alternative of civil unions. “

This is a lie. Obama has signalled to gay activist groups that he is for it. He is just letting others lay the groundwork so he doesnt take a political hit for it.

This column is beyond wrong.

[ridesthemiles]

Gays want free health benefits for themselves and their partners. Aids/HIV is a never ending black hole into which health costs can be dumped.
There isn’t an employer on Earth who can support the cost of paying for AIDS, which is what they want to achieve with the “acceptance” of gay marriage.

Gays are playing with fire on the issue of AIDS, and when they are infected, they want the rest of us to be “considerate and caring” and be willing to9 pay for their costs of care.

Not my problem. I didn’t play with their fire, nor did I light the match.