Like last year, I’ve been taking the temperature at CPAC on gay issues (particularly marriage).
And, as last year, I’m finding CPACers just not that concerned by the issue and pretty comfortable with something along the lines of civil unions.
Even the people against gay marriage just ain’t that against. Such as: Joe and Amanda (pictured above). Not a couple — I don’t think — despite the pose.
Anyway, I asked their general views on gay marriage, and here’s what I got:
Joe:
“I’m against gay marriage. I see somewhere along the lines of where President Bush is, where you can work out a civil union type of thing, which I think would make sense.”
"Something where they do have some sort of recognition.”
“I’m a little more left-wing on that point.”
Amanda:
“You need to have a male and female for development’s sake for a child.”
“But it’s not as important an issue to me — I guess because no one in my family is really dealing with that right now.”
“Of all the causes that I would go out and incite for, for or against gay marriage isn’t one.”
“I’ll let everybody else work on that.”
Joe:
“The generation before us, obviously they’re going to be a little bit more traditional.”
“They’ve never grown up with that idea [legal recognition for gay couples], and we’re going to be the generation introducing it.”
“It’s really not a big issue for most people unless it directly involves you.”
“Do what you want, just don’t advertise it.”
Perhaps there’s hope yet.
"Not a big issue for most people unless it directly involves you."
That’s conservatism.
And now, appropriately, I’m off to the marriage panel.
UPDATE: Turns out Joe and Amanda are a couple. Thanks to Joe for the email.
Are these folks aware that many of the anti–gay-marriage initiatives supported by their (probable) favourite party would also ban civil unions?
Have to wonder - no one against gay marriages has no problem with gay marriages - as long as it’s a gay man and a gay woman? Or even an asexual m/f couple. Or just infertile couples. But as soon as it’s about same sex couples, you start to hear about how they can’t be sanctified by marriage because they can’t have kids.
Now as a parent - I want grandchildren! But not enough to make my children miserable.
The weirdest part is that by being against civil unions, you are basically anti-capitalist. Marriage, above all, in a capitalist society, is a state sacntioning of financial union. Anything else belongs to the church, the synagogue, the mosque, the 12 naked hippies witnessing your union on the beach.
And it can’t be remarked often enough - the situation with gay marriage is no different than the situation with interracial marriage 40 years ago. Legal here and there - but you might have to go to another state to get married.
Until a Supreme Court decision in 1968 - ooh, is that the evil “activism”? - my wife and I didn’t necessarily have the right to marry. Anyone who wants to tell me that’s wrong and “judicial activism” is invited to debate the matter with my knuckles. The American way is on my side; the crazy ass Islamists are on yours.
will everyone just smoke a joint please and chill out
keep digging up the lukewarm, spineless types who wouldn’t stand up for any cause that might result in the scuffing of their Timberlands or a parking ticket on the black Suburban.
Homosexuality is a scourge and any tolerance of it officially is embracing a mass-emascualtion. But if you never had balls to begin with, I guess that wouldn’t matter….but for the rest of, clearly you can see why it’s an issue.
if you’re conservative…well, never mind. You’re not.