Marriage Can Be Dull, But All Weddings Should Be Festive And Gay!

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of California struck down two laws that had limited marriages to a license between a man and a woman (generally, heterosexuals) exclusively. This ruling means that same-sex couples (generally, homosexuals) have a constitutional right to marry in California.

This is good news for homosexuals who want to marry and advocates of equal rights for all Americans.

This is bad news for the two Democrats still running for President, because now they will have to say aloud to all of America that they oppose gay marriage.

This is a very awkward situation for most liberals in America and many leftists. Liberals want to vote for the Democrat, and most likely will vote for whichever of the two is nominated, but it means you have to decide that it is OK to vote for someone who does not support gay marriage, or take the ultimate liberal stance of inaction and insist that the government shouldn't be in the marriage business in the first place and all marriage should be banned (which is like saying guns kill people so iron should not be mined). This position allows us to continue to support Hillary Clinton (the seeming gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgender favorite) or Barack Obama (the secret agent for change).

As my readers know I am more offended by Clinton's position than Obama's because she so actively courts the 'gay vote' and 'gay money' while being clearly opposed to 'gay equality.' Obama doesn't really court the 'gay vote' and has never really been a 'friend of the gays.'

Irrespective of their homophobic positions, I am concerned about the injection of this divisive issue into the campaigning at this late date. John McCain will ride this issue directly into the hearts and wallets of every right-wing homophobe in America. Clinton and Obama, equally as homophobic as McCain in their position on the issue, cannot ride the same horse into conservative camps, lest they offend those of us who have decided to overlook their homophobic stance and vote for them anyhow.

If Clinton or Obama try to verbalize and capitalize upon the populist position (the anti-gay marriage position) they will show themselves as hypocrites. If Obama is really an agent of change then he should be supporting gay marriage, because that is an important change, and I believe, an inevitable change. If Clinton really does care about the millions of gay people who have supported her since 2000, then she really should be working to secure the right of same-sex couples to marry.

They could both be absolved of culpability in America's ongoing anti-gay movement if they advocated for abolishing marriage. But, that ain't gonna happen because marriage will always be licensed by the government and as long as same-sex couples are not allowed to marry, then the marriage laws are a failure.

But, neither the agent for change nor the GLBT heroine will be able to capitalize on this victory, because of their hypocrisy.

Look: you either support equal rights for homosexuals (who ARE taxpayers, after all), or you don't.

It's really not terribly complicated.

Take a stand, and have the courage of your convictions. Don't equivocate. And when you vote in November, remember that the Democratic Party has nobody in a leadership position who supports equal rights for homosexuals.

Perhaps it is time for homosexuals to join a party that will work for them.

California Supreme Court Overturns Gay Marriage Ban