- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
First of all, I loved this debate. Even though the topics were narrowly-focused (to be expected), I really liked the 15 solid minutes apiece with the candidates. I seemed to get a better feel for them with more time.
Despite my being hetero, I couldn't be more "Gravellian" in my full support of gay marriage (if you saw the debate, you'll know what I mean). AND...I appreciate the bind the candidates are in when they express their lack of support for gay "marriage".
When the Democrats backed civil rights in the 1960's (the absolute right thing to do), they lost the government for 30+ years. I'm concerned that will happen if we pass gay "marriage". I can see a first step as civil unions, which convey the exact same benefits of marriage - without the word. I agree that it's riduculous, but once people who oppose it see that gay civil unions are not tearing the country apart, only then will they be more accepting of gay "marriage". It's a strategy that could work.
I hope the gay community can accept incremental steps, despite how frustrating and unfair it is. We'll definitely get there, but it's important to make sure we keep moving in the right direction first.
