Friday, March 20, 2009

Gay Marriage legalized in Vermont...

Vermont Senate panel approves gay marriage bill

MONTPELIER, Vt. – A Vermont Senate committee has unamimously approved a bill that would legalize same-sex marriage in the state. Full story here.
What with Washington state approving Domestic Partnerships last week, it looks like what the conservatives call the 'homosexual agenda' is inexorably marching forward.

I liked Washington's compromise - creating a 'partnership' that had all the rights and protections of marriage, but without the thorny problem of actually labeling it marriage.

It was a compromise - and compromise is the lifeblood of progress.

Vermont's decision is sure to infuriate conservatives across America, because it genuinely does redefine the currently accepted notion of marriage (as being between a man and a woman.)

But it's a sign of things to come. It will take years for other states to come on board with what's happening in Massachusetts and Vermont, but eventually they'll have to.

Otherwise this issue will become as sticky as segregation in the 1950s and 1960s - and whatever they might have thought at the time, these days you don't see South Carolina proudly touting achievements like the fact that their Bob Jones university banned interracial dating until 2000.

By the time my son's grown up, I foresee gender being as inconsequential to marriage as race (theoretically) is today.

5 comments:

Tom said...

Now, this is doing it right. I support gay marriage, but it should be introduced through the legislature, not the courts.

Roland Hulme said...

I totally agree with you - I'm sad that the bill got defeated in California, but if the SC overrule it, doesn't that basically raise the middle finger to the voters and say: "Your vote counts ONLY if we agree with what you voted for."

Anonymous said...

This is great news.

The reason this will continue to be dealt with by courts, and eventually the U.S. Supreme Court is because of the Full Faith & Credit Clause provided by the U.S. Constitution. Wiki actually has a decent explanation here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_Faith_and_Credit_Clause

Sukhaloka said...

That "theoretically" is probably the most telling word in the whole article!
Still - it's a good beginning, and one that I'm happy about :)

UNRR said...

This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 3/21/2009, at The Unreligious Right