Proponents of same-sex marriage want this issue seen in the context of being a civil rights issue. Many others see homosexual relationships not meeting the definition of marriage (as being solely between a man and a woman). Moreover, many states have solidified that latter definition as law in their state constitutions.
It appears that no matter how many liberal states adopt same-sex marriage, there are other conservative states that will never adopt it. Do proponents of same-sex marriage really want to establish two separate nations on this issue, as divided as our nation was before 1865?
If the holier-than-thou proponents of same-sex marriage want to equate the homosexual lifestyle as being on par with civil rights, why not kick it up a notch and say it is also on par with slavery? Because that issue better represents how divided our nation is today on same-sex marriage.
Making it legal in some states only creates the same dilemma down the road of a “house divided” that faced our nation in 1860. Same-sex marriage proponents appear motivated to push it that far. Do they really think an Alabama or Mississippi will ever see the homosexual lifestyle in the same light as a “left-coast” state that endorses that lifestyle?
Same-sex marriage represents a moral divide in our nation – and Washington state has a clear choice to make on R-74. It’s certainly not about constitutional rights, but whether the homosexual lifestyle is worth the sacrifices of an Antietam or Gettysburg.