... even if you're going to remain a Democrat, do not give up on your conservative beliefs and principles. Just like with gay marriage -- blacks know gays, we have them in our families -- we love gays, but by and large, we do not want to see them get married.
Reginald Bohannon loves me! I'm all giddy. He loves me so much, he doesn't want to see me get married. Reggie, sugar, I am touched by your jealous streak. But really ... I am SO not your type.
Now of course, a lot of gay couples I know are already married. Not that the State recognizes it, necessarily, but they had a solemn commitment ceremony in a house of worship - a.k.a., a marriage - and they've gone about the whole business of loving and supporting and being faithful. Something must be done!
Fortunately, Reginald Bohannon has his "conservative beliefs and principles". (After all, he's "come out of the closet" as a conservative, and yes, Reginald, I'm just tickled to death that you borrowed that metaphor.) So if he "doesn't want to see gays get married", what are his options?
Well, he could try keeping his eyes closed, but I suspect that's not what he has in mind. I think he actually wants to stop gay folks from marrying each other. So, let's pass a law!
First, we've got to make domestic partnerships illegal. So, according to Reginald Bohannon's conservative beliefs and principles, the government must pass laws forbidding certain kinds of contracts between citizens. Then we've got to outlaw these "commitment ceremonies" in gay-friendly churches, because, who do these people think they're kidding? They're trying to get married, and we can't have that. So Congress needs to pass some laws respecting establishments of religion.
Oh, but maybe this is all a bit extreme. Perhaps we can allow those people to have something, just as long as it isn't called "marriage" and is not the equal of marriage. Because we love gay people, heck, some of our best friends are gay. They just need to remember their place. And we don't want to see them get married.
Thanks, Reginald Bohannon, for your concern, your caring, and most especially for your love. I'm very imprressed that you didn't waste your time talking about what conservatives might do to strengthen heterosexual marriage, or any of that wishy-washy stuff. No, it's all about queer folks.
Me, I'm just one of those live-and-let-live liberal types. I say, if Reginald Bohannon doesn't want to recognize my marriage, or the next-door neighbor's, that's really fine with me. It's his business, and I really wouldn't want the Government forcing that on anyone. Because what makes a marriage a marriage - what makes it sacred - is, by definition, entirely out of the Government's sphere.
What I would like from the State - and, in fact, what I will insist on - is full and equal protection in the material sphere. This includes the right to share the burdens and responsibilities of domestic life - in short, partnership. And I think everyone should have these rights.
You know, it's funny - I can remember (and it wasn't that long ago) when the conservative complaint against gays was that they were too promiscuous. I remember reading Norman Podhoretz' eloquent warning against the perils of an AIDS vaccine, which might allow gay men to "bugger each other by the hundreds with medical impunity." And now? Now the threat from gay folks is that they might start living like responsible adults.
Me, I'm easy. As far as I'm concerned, people should be free to practice in their private lives whatever perverse behaviors they want to indulge in ... even getting married.
