RECENT  POSTS:  » What most people aren't getting about the fake non-troversies of the anti-gay right » 'Weekly Standard' asst. editor equates Tim Cook with man who pits God against him » Michigan pastors make unfortunate lifestyle choice; say they'll go to jail rather than not discriminate » PFOX's Quinlan says SBC leader's opposition to 'reparative therapy' is cruel » That Idaho wedding venue posts new 'rules and regulations'; will still perform non-Christian weddings » Another deceptive thing about NOM's duplicitous anti-Hagan ad » NOM trying to shape Arkansas politics without even learning state's abbreviation » Video: Focus on the Family staffer who calls homosexuality 'particularly evil lie of Satan' hangs out in Chicago's Boystown » Video: Another new NOM ad targets Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR); uses James O'Keefe video as source » What the heck is 'NOM Victory Fund'?  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

03/03/2008

Iowa poll: Says yes to 'civil' compromise, I don't to 'I dos'

by Jeremy Hooper

200803031338A newly released Des Moines Register poll suggests that Iowa citizens support civil unions for same-sex couples, but are not yet in favor of the inevitable: marriage equality. Poll data is at link:

Iowans lean in favor of civil unions [Des Moines Register]

So essentially, Hawkeye Staters are starting to notice the writing on the wall, but they still need a better prescription glasses in order to see it guarantees that 100% freedom will ultimately prevail. It's certainly a step in the right direction, this civil unions support. But it's just a step. Until a vast majority starts recognizing marriage equality as the sort of idea whose polling should be confined to things like "register at Barneys vs. register at Bloomingdales?" we gays will have to keep pressing forward.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

I wonder if Iowans have been paying attention to New Jersey's failed attempt to grant equality by going this route. Perhaps they just feel they can do a better job of it than the Garden State?

Posted by: Jarred | Mar 3, 2008 3:32:43 PM

I only started reading your blog a few days ago, and I love it. However, I disagree with you very strongly on the issue of civil unions. Anyone deserves the right to marry the person they love, regardless of gender, because they are human beings and they have value and rights as such. The idea of settling for civil unions, whether or not one believes it is simply a pitstop on the inevitable path to marriage equality, is repulsive to me; there should be absolutely NO room for compromise on this. If we are serious when we say that not only do we want the right to marriage, but we deserve it as human beings, then we must be willing to do no less than demand it and accept nothing less. I refuse to relegate to those opposed to me having the rights I deserve the ability to determine when they feel ready to give me those rights. We deserve justice and we should not be willing to allow someone else to decide when we get it. I, for one, refuse to compromise on any issues regarding justice and I will fight with everything I've got until I have what I deserve as a fellow human being.

Posted by: Shayne | Mar 4, 2008 12:56:09 AM

Shayne: I'm confused. This site could not agree with you more in terms of civil unions. In fact, when the issue was being debated in New Jersey, few were speaking as loudly in opposition to the civil unions stop-gap as this writer!

What gave you the impression that we thought otherwise? This post says that civil unions are a step in the right direction, but only a step. And it explicitly says that we will not stop until marriage equality is achieved.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Mar 4, 2008 7:34:03 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails