In two comments, Conrad makes some very perceptive points about where Massachusetts really stands in regard to the highly charged and potentially explosive issue of gay marriage. Is it a step in the right direction, or does it set the stage for an unprecedented backlash? It’s useful to have a lawyer’s viewpoint of what it all really means. And I’m afraid that what he says makes a lot of sense.
November 21, 2003
The Discussion: 4 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
1
By jeremy
Too late – the unprecendent backlash is going to occur (and has begun) because of the metrosexual hype and the Queer Eye crap.
BTW, are you planning on getting married? If so, am I invited?
November 22, 2003 @ 8:06 am | Comment
2
By Richard
Unfortunately, I am not surprised. Yes, it was important and right, but where will it lead us? As I said, I never lobbied for this because I believe it is an idea whose time hasn’t come. Reading Sullivan a few days ago, you’d think gay marriage had been institutionalized. Maybe the ruling will push us in that direction, but it’s going to take more time. And no, I’m not getting married, at least not anytime soon. I have to better understand what the purpose is.
November 22, 2003 @ 10:35 am | Comment
3
By jeremy
The purpose is a better tax break, I thought. But that’s the heartless unromantic in me.
The romantic in me says to spend the rest of your life with the person you can’t imagine not seeing first thing in the morning, last thing at night, and whom you dream about. I know some girl like that.
November 22, 2003 @ 1:47 pm | Comment
4
By vaara
Having just moved to the Netherlands, which fully legalized same-sex marriage two years ago, I can personally attest to the fact that the institution of hetero marriage here has been utterly destroyed, and the social fabric shredded beyond repair.
um…
not.
November 25, 2003 @ 5:18 pm | Comment