I've been to a couple of rallies protesting the passage of Prop 8 lately, and I have realized that I HATE signs that read something like "I'm straight but I don't hate" or Straight but not Narrow." Can't you just carry a sign arguing for gay and queer rights? Or even a sign like this? Do you have to somehow announce your A) straightness and B) broadmindedness in a way that suggests you're actually really afraid someone might think you're (gasp!) gay?
Second, I always feel vaguely disreputable and uncomfortable when people argue for the validity of gay rights on the grounds that sexual orientation is not a choice. This doesn't mean I reject the compelling scientific and personal evidence supporting the claim that sexual orientation is not a choice. I believe it's not a choice. I just think it should be respected as a choice, because even if orientation isn't a choice, deciding to pursue a relationship with someone of the same sex IS a choice--a completely legitimate choice, as far as I'm concerned.
I don't see why someone shouldn't be able to CHOOSE a same-sex partner, for any reason whatsoever. I think doing so should be about the same as becoming a poet or a vegan or a tuba player: OK, not choices most people make, but entirely respectable nonetheless.
Within the purview of the US government and constitution, why shouldn't it be completely legal and acceptable for someone to CHOOSE a same-sex partner? Don't tell me it's because God finds it objectionable, even if he told you so himself, because he tends to complain about different things to different people. Furthermore, whether or not he approves of something doesn't always seem to have much impact on its legality. For instance, he's told Mormons that he objects to booze and coffee and tobacco, but they're all still legal, even in Utah. He told Jehovah's Witnesses that he objects to patriotism and birthday parties, and they're legal. He told Christian Scientists that he objects to flu shots and surgery, and they're legal. He told Catholics he doesn't approve of birth control, but it's still legal (at least for the time being). He told everyone he doesn't approve of greed and selfish disregard for the plight of the needy and the poor, but they're still legal--hell, they're revered, at least by Wall Street and the Republican party.
Now, I realize that choosing a same-sex partner and being able to marry that same-sex partner you've chosen aren't exactly the same thing--right now, you can do the former but not the latter, except in Massachusetts and Connecticut. But they're also not that different. And marriage, like any and all institutions, has evolved throughout its existence. It has had different gradations and types, some of which we don't like to think about, especially the weird kind God apparently thought were perfectly OK at some point, like concubinage or polygamy. We could still have those if we hadn't decided we wanted higher standards than ones God insisted on. So why can't we have higher standards for equality in marriage now? After all, God is a really slow learner. It's up to us to set the right example for him.
And so, I AFFIRM THE RIGHT TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AS A CHOICE ANY ADULT SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO MAKE IN ANY STATE IN THIS COUNTRY.