Just a year ago, I worked with my Democratic colleagues in the Senate as well as with LGBT leaders to defeat the divisive and discriminatory Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA). Since then, we not only defeated FMA, but we have been able to make real progress in achieving fairness for all Americans.
Okay, if the Federal Marriage Amendment was discriminatory for defining marriage as between a man and a woman, wouldn't the failure to act to allow same sex marriage be the same? One a sin of commission and the other a sin of omission? Hillary -- like the rest -- doesn't believe gays should be able to marry (we get civ unions instead) so how is her position non-discriminatory?
I don't get it. Explain it to me?
(hat tip: Gay Orbit)
No comments:
Post a Comment