A Stitch in Haste

If it's "only about marriage," then why aren't the anti-gay forces in California celebrating?

[T]he California Supreme Court let stand a new law granting registered domestic partners many of the same rights and protections of heterosexual marriage.

Without comment, the unanimous justices upheld appellate and trial court rulings that the sweeping measure does not conflict with a voter-approved initiative defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
...
Groups opposing the law said Wednesday they hope to qualify a ballot measure asking voters to overturn the justices, and perhaps to bar gay and lesbians from ever getting married in California.

"Certainly, this reflects the importance of the people of California rising up to insure that their vote in 2000 is counted and not overlooked by the courts," said Robert Tyler, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, which asked the justices to overturn the law.

So the anti-gay factions got exactly what they claim to want: no gay marriage in California. Equal rights (for the most part), equal treatment, equal dignity. Just no marriage.

And still they're upset.

Go figure.

Of course, the reason they're upset is because it's not about marriage at all. It's about naked bigotry.

With each new referendum by them, or court challenge by us, the untenable nature of their position becomes more obvious, their propaganda less defensible and their lies more blatant.

And with each new Massachusetts same-sex marriage, Vermont civil union or Connecticut ceremony, the sky will continue not falling and the politics of "no big deal" will gain momentum.

Are we moving from the end of the begiining to the beginning of the end?

If not now, then soon.

POST SCRIPT: Law passed via elected legislators. People unhappy with the law sue to have it overturned by a court. What's the term conservatives use for that again?