Not long ago there was the "compromise" proposal for federal civil unions which I, and several others, declared to be a non-starter because the Fundies would never compromise enough to make it happen. Here's another twist of a compromise: bundle together gay marriage and covenant marriage.
Covenant marriage and other divorce reduction ideas stress longer waiting periods between separation and actual divorce, premarital education, and family courts that stress mediation. The advantage of the combination is that gays and straights together can say we are for the sanctity of marriage. Or it will at least flush out the Fundies who don't care about preserving marriage but only want to stick it to the homos.
Pam Spaulding, the blogmistress where this idea is discussed carefully did not say she was for it, only that she wrote about it to see what other gay people thought. She got an earful.
Covenant marriage ideas trade away women's rights. That's no better than trading away gay rights. Besides, covenant marriage is only another way for the church to intrude on a civil relationship.
Why should we compromise with the small number of loud voices who are hostile to us? Why deal with people who believe our happiness threatens theirs? Better we should work on converting the apathetic to our cause.
One of the advantages of gay relationships at this time in history is we get to define our relationships, whether or not we do so under the banner of marriage. There is no such thing as a "proper" gay marriage. A few straight marriages could learn from our freedom.
That gay marriages strengthen the institution instead of harming it should be debated on its own merits. Fundies haven't provided any counter-evidence.
Fundies weren't going to support federal civil unions. They're not going to support this bundling either.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment