specialagency.net

The rhetorical war.

My little temper tantrum has provoked some genuinely interesting discussion, all the better. The part I really want to clarify is this: I'm most concerned, right now, with the battle over semantics.

One common criticism that gay-marriage supporters are aiming at the actions of both San Francisco city officials and the Massachussetts courts is that it's too soon, that forcing the issue now will result in a backlash. Certainly it's something to be concerned about. I believe absolutely that this kind of change requries a bold action in order to come to pass, that it isn't something that's going to just appear as the result of increased social warm-fuzzies. I also believe absolutely that the bold action needs to come at a time when the groundwork has already been laid--if the social change you're pushing for is one that's too far outside of what society is prepared to accept, you're going to fail. So you have to take this kind of step, but you can't take it too soon.

Ten years ago, five years ago even, it would have been too soon. I think we're ready now. The pop-culture signs point to yes; I could elaborate, but I think we're all familiar with the difference between the fall of Ellen and the rise of The Ellen Degeneres Show, not to mention the difference between the gasp! of Madonna kissing Sandra Bernhardt and the yawn. of Madonna kissing Britney. Middle America may still be suspicious of gay marriage, but polling data indicates that they're not really prepared to deny Kyan or Rosie the right to a civil union.

And that's the real core of what I'm trying to get at. Down in that comments discussion, Jed suggested that the real problem is that the word "marriage" is fraught with connotation, and he's right, and that's part of the point. We already have in this country a commonplace and commonly-accepted institution of "civil unions", partnerships that carry all the legal weight of marriage without having the religious implications, but we call it civil marriage. From that starting point, the rest is mainly a battle over semantics. Where that battle is going to be lost is if it seems like shaking the religious connotations off of the word "marriage" is a strange and exotic thing, rather than a thing we've already done.