Doggedly searching for the crux of the biscuit.
San Francisco's granting of gay marriage licenses has started the conversation rolling around the country. The courage (and media savvy) of Mayor Gavin Newsome has given cover for other leaders around the country to state the obvious: this is an issue of civil rights versus bigotry, nothing more and nothing less. But among the leaders coming out in favor of equality, I sure didn't see this one coming.
Cambodia's King Norodom Sihanouk has shown that advancing years are no barrier to an open mind and liberal attitude. After watching television images of gay marriages in San Francisco, the 81-year-old monarch has decided that single sex weddings should be allowed in Cambodia too. He expressed his views in a hand written message on his website which has proved extremely popular in Cambodia.
Don't you just hate it when a third-world country makes you look unenlightened?
Update (11:45 am): Liberal Oasis has an interesting examination of how Mayor Newsome has outsmarted the Beltway Democrats on this.
TrackBackLast night at the bar (American Legion Post 564) a guy was circulating a petition for a constitutional amendment defining "traditional marriage". I refused to sign. I said I didn't think it was any of the government's business. Everybody at my table nodded their head in agreement. I didn't even see one signature in the whole house. And these are crusty old war veterans you might think would lean conservative. Interesting.
Posted by: Afterburner at February 22, 2004 12:55 PMGood to hear and good for y'all. Aside from the religious right (whose votes are solidly Bush in any event), I don't think the American public is interested in culture wars at a time when our military is bogged down in Iraq, our schools are bursting at the seams, health care costs are spiralling, and the economy increasingly appears stuck in neutral. That is not to say that there is some huge groundswell of support for gay marriage; I know full well there is not. Rather, many just consider it a distraction from much larger issues and frankly, they'd rather not have to think about it at all.
Because really, if the government isn't mandating that you marry within your gender, then it just doesn't affect you.
Posted by: apostropher at February 22, 2004 01:20 PMWell, crusty? I think not. If we were too conservative, considering all the training most of us has had, you would not have the ability to write your comments to this post. Truth is, one or two, maybe more expressed to you their thoughts... but you did not talk to everyone. So don't go pegging the rest of us until you do so. Furthermore, I hate to admit it, don't go pegging our Post, since we are not so large of a group representing any particular school of thought.
Come to think of it, why are you not supporting the vets, and those of us who have offered our futures, and our lives, to protect you, your family, and ours - as was our choice, or in some times (Vietnam) the call of our country? Think about this before you decide who get's to sleep with who.
For myself, I only wish that everyone of us finds a true partner in life. I won't define it, if you won't. Draw the line. Move on. We are both wasting time. Support the entire human race, not just a fraction of it.
Best regards to you, and yours....
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Wells at April 28, 2006 02:17 AM