{"id":679,"date":"2004-03-09T06:55:08","date_gmt":"2004-03-09T14:55:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.amptoons.com\/blog\/archives\/2004\/03\/09\/same-sex-marriage-civil-unions-and-country-club-bigotry\/"},"modified":"2004-03-09T06:55:08","modified_gmt":"2004-03-09T14:55:08","slug":"same-sex-marriage-civil-unions-and-country-club-bigotry","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/?p=679","title":{"rendered":"Same-sex marriage, civil unions, and country-club bigotry"},"content":{"rendered":"

Elizabeth Marquardt responds to my post “Why Are Gay Interests So Easily Sacrificed?”<\/a> In that post, I wrote:<\/p>\n

Elizabeth says she’s not bigoted against lesbians and gays, and I believe her. Nonetheless, her argument is premised on bigotry against lesbians and gays. It is only in the context of a bigoted society that a reasonable person like Elizabeth could advocate treating gays as objects to be sacrificed for others’ benefit.<\/p>\n

I agree that reducing divorce would be a good thing. I agree that children’s welfare would improve if more heterosexual parents stayed together in healthy marriages.<\/p>\n

But I cannot, will not agree that lesbians, gays and their families are appropriate objects for sacrifice. I cannot, will not agree that their interests should be trashed for someone else’s ends. Lesbians and gays are not pawns fit for sacrifice – and to suggest they are is an endorsement of bigotry (whether or not the speaker is personally bigoted). There are other possible approaches to saving het marriage. Let’s pursue those approaches, and allow same-sex families the equality that should be their birthright.<\/p><\/div>\n

Elizabeth responds:<\/p>\n

He takes my arguments seriously, and I appreciate that. But I don’t think excluding SS couples from marriage is “sacrificing” them, as he repeats many times. If anything, I think legally including them so that our entire language of marriage would have to be gender neutral — husbands and wives, mothers and fathers, become “spouses” and “parents” — would be sacrificing the needs of straight people and particularly their children to satisfy the desire of a very small number of gay and lesbian people. In public schools, the public square, and polite conversation, all we will be able to say is children need “parents.” Saying they need mothers and fathers will be offensive and possibly ruled discriminatory. How do I make my case that family structure matters to children when I’m not allowed to name the specific parts of the structure?<\/p>\n

Besides, I don’t deny that SS couples and their children need the legal benefits and obligations of marriage, which is why I support civil unions.<\/p>\n

Gee, remember when just a few months ago it put one comfortably on the left to say you supported civil unions?<\/p><\/div>\n

A few points:<\/p>\n