« Gotta Take a Break | Main | Forests and Trees »

August 09, 2007

Separate but equal

The Annenberg Public Policy Center's FactCheck.org has a new piece out called What is a Civil Union? In it they examine the various things that different politicians mean by "civil unions" and the philosophical/political premises of each type's opponents. One type in particular caught my attention.

The least concrete difference between civil unions and marriage is also perhaps the most polarizing: the term “marriage” and the social and cultural weight it bears. For many, this is not just a semantic issue. Opponents are concerned that allowing gays to marry will dilute the term “marriage,” threatening the institution it stands for. Supporters, meanwhile, feel that setting up a marriage-like institution for gays (such as civil unions) while defining marriage as fundamentally heterosexual is an example of flawed “separate but equal” legislation.

The whole "marriage" thing is where I've long most disagreed with gay rights advocates.

Setting aside the fact that I feel strongly that the government has absolutely no business being involved with anything beyond the strictly contractual elements of marriage, I support and would happily vote to impliment a civil union statute/law which is as perfectly equal to marriage as possible. But I don't support gay marriage. And I don't for the same reason that I wouldn't support legally redefining Feline to include Canines, Republican to include Communist (although it is tempting...), female to include male or vice versa.

The "separate but equal" argument is specious, in my view, and borders on demagoguery. There are all sorts of things in our daily lives which are absolutely "separate but equal" and nobody complains about any of those. Under most circumstances (ie. no emergency) I can't legally enter a women's restroom in Portland. In fact I could be arrested for it. Separate but equal. The Democratic Party can't legally rename themselves or some fraction of themselves as the Republican Party, thereby potentially throwing our entire political system into chaos. Separate but equal. If Animal Control were to insist that I register my cats I couldn't legally register them as dogs or horses or gold fish. Separate but equal.

It seems to me that gay rights advocates need to decide what it is that they really want. Do they want equal civil rights or do they want to coopt a name. If the former then I'll back 'em up at the ballot box. If the former then I won't.

Posted by Kevin at August 9, 2007 09:11 PM