February 21, 2004

Gay Marriages

Posted by shonk at 12:02 AM in Politics | TrackBack

It appears the civil disobediance going on in San Francisco this week has spawned at least one copycat: the Republican county clerk of Sandoval County, New Mexico, today started issuing marriage licenses to gay couples in the county seat of Bernalillo, saying “[i]t’s going to be across the country and so we wanted to be ahead of the curve.” Even though the state attorney general declared those licenses null and void, there is no doubt in my mind that other county and city clerks around the country will follow the example of San Francisco and Sandoval County.

The news in San Francisco has prompted numerous politicians to speak out in favor of legalized gay marriage, including the mayors in Chicago, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, Denver and Plattsburgh, NY. Even the King of Cambodia got in on the act. Students around the country are comparing gay marriage to the hotly-contested interracial marriage debate of the 1940’s, while a report prepared for the Software Industry Center at Carnegie Mellon suggests that the lack of legal status for gay couples is hurting economic growth in the U.S.

The two best quotes of the day:

I’ve already made clear my stance on the issue, which is that marriage is simply none of the state’s business. Nonetheless, I find the whole debate morbidly interesting.

(Hat tip to John Venlet for the Bernalillo and Northwestern links)


Doesn't this fall in the Bill Hicks "Anyone dumb enough to want to be ______ should be allowed in" category?

Posted by: Curt at February 21, 2004 01:39 AM

Yeah, pretty much.

Posted by: shonk at February 21, 2004 01:50 AM

I enjoyed the "morbidly interesting" comment.

Posted by: John Venlet at February 21, 2004 09:31 AM

A lot of the anti-gay-marriage rhetoric warns that polygamous marriage will be next on the legalization agenda (example).

In a poorly designed software system, fixing one bug often leads to the creation of more bugs, and sometimes can break the system altogether (probably why Microsoft takes so long to fix security bugs). I don't think it would be a stretch to draw an analogy between this and state-sanctioned marriage.

Posted by: mock at February 21, 2004 10:07 AM

Yeah, once you start letting people choosing how they want to arrange their own lives, who knows where that slippery slope will lead?

Posted by: Curt at February 21, 2004 02:25 PM

Like Curt, I have no problem in principle with polyamory; it doesn't interest me personally, but if other people want to engage in it, I have no objection.

However, I suspect it would be a much tougher sell even than gay marriage.

Posted by: shonk at February 21, 2004 02:36 PM