Gay marriage

New York passed gay marriage yesterday, becoming the sixth state (plus DC, though they don't really count.  "Taxation without representation" and all that.  It's even on their licence plates.  Why would they even advertise that?  But I'm rambling.  Here's the rest of the sentence) to do so.  First of all, I think many, if not all of the rights afforded to straight couples should have been given to gays a long time ago, and withholding them is just stupid.  Hospital rights, inheritance and military service are a few of the things that come to mind.  Many on the religious right would argue that homosexuality is wrong, period, and while I personally am not comfortable with the thought of two sweaty dudes going at it, the morality of it is not where my beef lies.

Though this is pretty much wrong no matter who you ask

We lost much valuable manpower and skills by not allowing gays to serve in the military up until now.  They can turn a wrench, fire a rifle or type on a keyboard just as well as their straight counterparts.  There are certain areas where it wouldn't be wise, in my opinion, such as the battlefield,  for the same reason they don't allow women into some types of combat; because it can degrade morale, some people would be uncomfortable, etc.  However, most of the military today is now in either a support position or working in offices.  Only a small percentage fights in the traditional infantry position that comes to mind when you say 'soldier'.

I get that two people of the same gender can love each other.  I really do.  But the only thing I disagree with is the term 'marriage' to describe a homosexual union.  Marriage has always been a religious institution.  Even though many LGBT supporters will argue that its current definition as the union between one man and one woman is relatively new, homsexuality has never been accepted by most religions.  And I doubt that's going to change any time soon.  In fact, why would gays even want to subscribe to something promoted by groups that have persecuted them for millenia?  That's like an African American demanding entrance into the KKK, because...I don't know, equality or something. 

Just...no.

My point here is that instead of trying to get the religious right to accept gay marriage as a thing, homosexuals should focus on getting the same rights offered to straight couples.  Leave 'marriage' to the religious.  Be the bigger person.  Let the baby have its bottle.  Smell what I'm serving here?  Gays complain about their rights being infringed, and that's true for the most part, but marriage is an intrinsic part of the life of faith of (non-gay accepting) religious people, and demanding entrance tramples upon the beliefs of a large segment of the population.

What I propose is that it be called something different.  Call it a domestic partnership.  Call it a legal union, call it whatever the fuck you want, just not marriage.  I think it would have been passed a lot sooner if they hadn't stubbornly insisted on using that term.