Cal Thomas, writing in WorldMag, (via Andrew Sullivan) manages to be both terribly wrong, then terribly right about gay marriage and civil rights in general:
"As Iowa and other courts continue to dismantle the foundations of our nation without the approval of its citizens (each time the public gets an opportunity to vote on marriage, it votes to uphold the male-female version), they have an obligation to say where they intend to take us. What is the new standard for human relationships? Or do we make this up as we go, bowing to whatever pressure group makes the most noise?"
Yadda, yadda, yadda. Bill Murray summed this up best in GhostBusters: "Dogs and cats! Living together!" And humans marrying dogs and cats, or one human marrying 'leventy-seven humans, all to-be-expected when gays, gasp, are allowed to marry.
By the way, in 1964, when the Civil Rights Act was passed due to the provocations of 'a pressure group' or when the military was desegregated, how many Americans would have voted for it? Some things—the just things that citizens are unable to bring themselves to do—have to be done for them. Now let's go from Murray to Rousseau; sometimes, we have to be forced to be free. Ending (de jure), state-backed racism freed whites just as much as it freed blacks. Racism was one of those foundations of America, as was sexism, xenophobia, property qualifications for voting; when will this tired argument be retired? Still, Thomas goes on to be profound, intellectually honest, and even brave, given his opposition to gay marriage:
To those on the political and religious right who are intent on continuing the battle to preserve "traditional marriage" in a nation that is rapidly discarding its traditions, I would ask this question: What poses a greater threat to our remaining moral underpinnings? Is it two homosexuals living together, or is it the number of heterosexuals who are divorcing and the increasing number of children born to unmarried women, now at nearly 40 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?"
Most of those who are disturbed about same-sex marriage are not as exercised about preserving heterosexual marriage. That's because it doesn't raise money and won't get them on TV. Some preachers would rather demonize gays than oppose heterosexuals who violate their vows by divorcing, often causing harm to their children. That's because so many in their congregations have been divorced and preaching against divorce might cause some to leave and take their contributions with them."
The battle over same-sex marriage is on the way to being lost. For conservatives who still have faith in the political system to reverse the momentum, you are—to recall Harold Hill—"closing your eyes to a situation you do not wish to acknowledge.