The point of the gay marriage amendments...

Given the topic of my last post, I thought I would weigh in with an additional thought or two about the controversy over "moral values" being the top issue in the elections (for previous thoughts, see here).

Was it a ploy to drive the religious conservatives to the polls? It would certainly seem that way to me based on the fact that in 10 of the 11 states with referenda, gay marriage wasn't legal anyway. So what's the point?

Apparently the point is two-fold...

Using unthinking shorthand that carries out the hidden agendas of the people who want gays banished to the fringes of society, the press has over and over again referred to these measures as banning gay marriage. In fact that is only accurate regarding three of the 11 initiatives passed last week.

In state after state -- most prominently in Ohio (which Bush barely won) and in Michigan (which he nearly did) -- these referendums went far beyond the question of who gets to be formally married. They also banned legal and other conventions incidental to marriage, which are central to the evolving institutions of civil unions and domestic partnerships.

Remember: polls show support for civil unions to be around 50%, with individual freedoms and rights that would be granted by civil unions polling much higher when considered separately.

But that's the way they play this game... use one view to slip a more extreme measure through the door...