Politics IV or (I'm really not kidding)
Ok. I don't care. But conservative voters seem to. The idea that they are 'defending marriage' means something to them. So they go vote. While they're there they vote for Republicans.
Still most of them don't think there should be different rights for gays. Not less rights for gays. THIS IS REALLY ABOUT A DEFINITION.
What if it just meant the same thing, but we called it a different name?
Gay Marriage. Garriage? Same rights. Same tax penalty. Same visitation in the hospital?
Marriage is for straights. Garriage is for gays!
I'm not kidding. Would that make everyone happy? Everyone except the Republican politicians that are using Gay Marriage to scare the traditional?
posted by Maqz @ 4:44 AM
3 Comments:
I think you are right. Civil unions is the term. Why fight over a name? Yes it is a second class kind of thing but for now it is better for people to get the benefits and not worry about the name. It could take some of the steam out of the right’s hot air machine.
Ed
Sometimes I vget so sceptical when religion is used to justify not extending benefits to gays I think that surely it must be because of money not religion that people are so worried. How can we be exhorted to treat people compassionately and then say that because of how they love, they are contemptable? I guess I read a different Bible when I was growing up. Oh yeah, no national healthcare, and private employers don't want to spend more either.
I say let gays share benefits. How calling it the sacrament of fabluosity? Ooops, that may offend. I shouldn't have tried that tired old streotype of gays as over the top and campy...
Um garriage then.
Love that name. Somewhere between splat and bounce.
Post a Comment
<< Home