Good As You

At one point in my life, I considered that Dan Savage wasn't "mainstream" enough and that he might be more detrimental to the cause of equality than he was beneficial. But, I'm happy to say that I now believe that I was wrong. I am now much less concerned with being "vanilla" enough, so as not to piss off too many people, but now realize that we greatly benefit from being articulate, engaging and compelling. And (fortunately) our side is rife with shining examples of precisely that, of which Savage is certainly one. Our opponents... not so much...

Hey guys, I hope the line isn't too long to slap ol' Maggie Gallagher across the face every time she utters, "but, marriage is special between a mommy and a daddy!" That is so racist and sexist! It's blatant discrimination! Legally you CANNOT make a legal-"institution" for one segment of the population, but bar another segment from taking part. How can she honestly declare that in a debate and believe it gives her something to defend her position with? Anyone feel like an effigy burning tonight? I'll bring the marshmallows! Oh, and if anyone should have any "contacts" while in jerset, I think that poor Jimmy might be getting a little lonely for some female companionship. *EG* Just sayin' is all...

"Lady parts". Well, I lost part of them to several aggressive tumors and cysts.
If that's what I need to qualify for a 'real marriage', then I wonder how many OTHER hetero or gay people wouldn't qualify because their 'parts' are no longer capable of making life or aren't there at all?

WTF is it with these people who invalidate or devalue the lives of anyone who hasn't or won't have a child.
As IF, we're not making direct or indirect contributions to the support of mankind through our labors, taxation, commitment to good works or other sacrifices voluntary or involuntary?

WTF is it with these contradictory terms of who is qualified to marry based on something the government can't control ANYWAY?
Like who is the breadwinner and who bathes the baby full time at home?
Why assume men can only do THAT, or women can only do THIS outside of the basic biomechanics of BEARING a child.
Indeed, my favorite rabbi had a baby AND works full time as clergy and her wife is a lawyer.

I know a lesbian couple who are both law enforcement officers and both are former military women. One had their son (and got decorated for valor) while still with the Marines.

I'd like to see Brian Brown of NOM top THAT, the pasty face wuss!

Anyway, those of us who haven't had children or lost part of our ability to bear them, aren't chopped liver.
Children ARE raised by amazing gay parents who did something that Mags didn't.

Adopted children outside of their ethnic or cultural comfort zone.
These are the children that have less sexism, racism or dispassion about people with disabilities. These are children that understand what social justice really is and means.
Maggie,if she really believed in traditional marriage, would be at home like a good lil wifey and attend to her husband and child and have none of this 'professional woman' smell on her.

But that's just it.
"Traditional" is also stifling, staid and has no interest in more and more egalitarian marriage, which is what this extension of marriage would represent.
Mags is the one that needs to 'go do something else', like advocate and spend some of that money on children of domestic violence.

I'd have a hell of a lot more respect for her if THAT was her life's ambition. Instead of getting in the path of gay couples doing what she can't make half of the heteros in this country do.

Regan: I hope you took no offense with "lady parts' in the headline. I was just being silly, suggesting that women were the ones who suffered under TRUE "traditional marriage."