Who is supporting the gays?

I have been reading through CNN's coverage of the presidential candidates on both sides for the past few days. Through the flow charts, line graphs, and .. okay, actually it was just a really easy-to-read, well-organized chart that detailed their respective takes on certain issues: taxes, abortion, social security, immigration, Iraq, and of course, same-sex marriage. Out of all of the Democratic candidates, only two support same-sex marriage--and I don't think either of those two has a snowball's chance in hell of winning. Hillary opposes it, but supports civil unions, but thinks that states should ultimately decide--yeah, Hil, leave it up to individual states so that you don't have to take a stand for your gay constituents. Obama feels the same way. Where are the leaders who will do what is right and stand up for gay rights?

I've never, not ever, heard a compelling argument against gay rights. I've heard variations of the same two or three arguments floating around. One of the arguments is, "If we let gays marry each other, what's next--people marrying dogs or children?" This is one of the most ludicrous arguments I have ever, ever heard. Let me break it down to you: Marriage between a man and a woman, in the eyes of the government, is a contract between two consenting adults. Marrying a child or a dog, in the eyes of the government, would be attempting to enter into a contract with either a minor, who is not old enough to legally enter into a contract, or a dog, who will never be able to legally consent to a contract. To which of these is gay marriage more similar? If you picked the option with two consenting adults, congratulations--you're not a total blathering idiot. What two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedroom does not affect you whatsoever. It doesn't affect you when Bobby and Mary Jane do it in their bedrooms down the road, and it's the same when Bobbie and Mary Jane do it around the block. It's also completely different from pedophelia and bestiality--by comparing it to that, what you're really saying is, "I don't think it's right because homosexuality is sick." And that's both wrong and ignorant--and, if you don't mind my saying so, sick.

The other arguments usually have to do with God. Here's a news flash: America is not in allegiance with any particular deity. Our founding fathers set it up that way, and so it has been ever since. We're not a Christian nation, and that's not my opinion; it's constitutional, baby. So why do I have to believe what your God says about homosexuality? I don't. And if I don't believe it, then it ceases to be a valid argument. Let's do what we've been doing for centuries and leave God out of politics.

Democrats, I'm surprised at you. Gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual people deserve the same rights that every other tax-paying citizen has. We are all born Americans, we have the freedom of religion (which means we can choose a homosexual-friendly religion if we want), we are consenting adults; so who, speaking not as a Christian but as an American, has the right to say that they oppose same-sex marriage? As far as the government is concerned, it shouldn't matter. It's just a contract between two adults. That doesn't mean that the Catholic church is going to have to start performing gay weddings; they have the right to say no as members of the private sector, but as the government, you don't.

It's just not right.