The first of the marriage debates that I listened to, in Vermont, was very enlightening in a number of ways. I had recently gotten married myself, after living with my partner for seven years, and still had mixed feelings about the institution. And then suddenly there were all these people speaking out about why they wanted the opportunity to get married. Couples raising children together, couples dealing with sicknesses, couples who just wanted what I had had, a nice little party with my friends and family to celebrate a relationship.
And on the other side, there was this insane, irrational hatred. All this nonsensical stuff about protecting children, and about how the purpose of marriage was to have children. ("Huh," I thought. "And why aren't they campaigning to keep infertile heterosexuals from marrying, or to keep post-menopausal women from marrying?" Birth control for married people, I suspected, might be next on their hit list.)
And it created a statewide conversation, even if it ultimately resulted in civil unions rather than marriage.
Colorado's two ballot initiatives (domestic partnerships and a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage), on the other hand, don't seem to be starting conversations. The domestic partnership initiative is promoted as "not marriage... see, it's NOT MARRIAGE." And it seems as if that defensiveness concedes an important part of the debate, even before it starts. The practical parts, inheritance rights and rights to participate in medical decisions and all, are important, but what was really powerful about the debates in Vermont was the realization that these are real people, our friends and neighbors, and this is fundamentally unfair to them. And I'm not hearing that story being told in Colorado.
I still want to defeat Focus on the Family here in their home state, though.
