Word is Virginia is introducing an amendment to its Bill of Rights that will limit marriage to hetero unions. It’s reported that our new Governor (a Democrat no less) will not attempt a veto. How about that, an amendment to the Bill of Rights telling a group of citizens they can’t do something. How’s that for thinking outside the box? Imagine the Vigrinia Bill of Rights:

• You have the right to do this…
• You have the right to do that…
• You have the right to do these other things…
• Only these people can do this…

I guess I am not religious enough to understand the big gripe over gay marriages. How is this not discrimination? Virginia’s government is saying a group of people are excluded from attaining the legal designation ‘married’. Sure, many states have offered compromises in the form of civil unions, but have a look here. Civil Unions certainly create a ‘seperate but equal’ situation that has been deemed unconstitutional in this country. The only way to overturn that is to amend the Constitution. Once that is done, we will have freedom and equality for all except for gays when it comes to marriage.

How is this not like the good old days when slaves couldn’t own property? Or when women and blacks couldn’t vote? Essentially, by saying gays cannot get the legal protection and benefits of marriage, our governments are creating a seperate and unequal legal landscape.

I don’t give a damn what anyone’s religious beliefs are. If the sanctity of marriage is so important, petition your representatives in congress to stop all benefits and protections afforded to married people. It’s a religious designation only with no legal meaning at all. At that point, I have no problem refusing to allow gay marriage. But when marriage brings legal benefits and protection at the federal level, it is no longer a state issue. It’s also a no-brainer. If being gay is legal, and gay relationships are legal, then disallowing gay marriage is segregation. Pure and simple.