All it takes is one state to go real on gay marriage, and you've got the meat of a court fight that will go all the way to the US Supreme Court. Yes, a fillibuster-proof majority will be nice to have, when Bush goes to make his first appointment to the Court, but we've got to get there first. We're all hoping that Stevens will croak, but the chances are, it will be O'Connor or Rehnquist who retires early. All Bush will be able to do is to appoint someone at least as conservative as them, and while it can be argued that O'Connor is not as conservative as she started out to be, that seat is a permanent "woman's seat" (just like Thurgood Marshall's was a "black seat") and we have no guarantees that whatever woman Bush nominates will be reliable. I just remember how Souter fooled GWB's father.
In any case, you have the immediate problem before you. Vermont faced this situation, and the civil union thing kept the issue within their borders. No other state has to recognize a VT civil union at this point. If the alternative of civil union is adopted in MA, all you need is one of those four votes in last week's decision to be softened, and its a 4-3 vote to accept civil union as being a solution to the court's order. This also has an effect on every other court in the land, if the option of civil union is out there on the table, the courts can back away from ordering gay marriage, and say that it's up to the legislature to come up with a civil union plan.
Would we be a better country if abortion were only allowed in limited circumstances in the states where it was politically popular, or do you prefer the "any abortion, any time, any circumstances" that we have now? With abortion, you either kill the kid, or you don't, there is no middle step. With civil union, we have the "neutral" place to go to. All it is, is a set of contract rights. It does not compel any heterosexual person to do anything. You can still crack "fag" jokes if you want to, even at work if you live in a place where homosexuals are not a protected class.
I don't agree with your contention that most people in this country are moderately conservative. Many people are becoming fiscally conservative, but that is a far cry from being socially conservative. Please remember that the majority of voters in this country are in the baby boomer years, who remember the civil rights fights of the 1960's as a formative event in their childhood, or their young adulthoods. If the issue can be framed in those terms, gay marriage wins. Another group of people who are potential voters is the generations X and Y, who followed the boomers. They missed out on the Freedom Rides, and they're looking for a way to make their mark on what they see as freedom in America, and to oppose the Establishment. They're the ones showing up at Howard Dean rallies on college campuses.
I don't disagree that most people in your circles, and probably in mine are not comfortable with gay marriage, but I submit to you, that just by being members of this forum, we are not typical Americans. The cities are chock full of people who know, work with, and may be related to openly gay people. An all or nothing framing of the gay marriage issue will put them squarely in the "all" camp. The alternative of civil union will make them feel more comfortable, and the issue takes on less passion for them.
The six month clock is ticking. We don't have any major elections in that time, except for an uncontested Republican nomination process, and a fiercely contested Rat nomination process. The leading Rats really don't want to have to talk about gay marriage, but they can be forced into it. If it gets into the media, look for them to try to capture the high ground, with stories about love and committment, Tom Brokaw is not going to show you scenes of gay pride parades. The left will be able to convince the middle, especially if there is no civil union alternative. Those bitterly opposed to civil union will be portrayed as unyielding Scrooges who would just as soon throw homosexuals in jail. Yes, there was a pretty immediate backlash in public opinion after Lawrence vs. Texas, but it has already subsided.
Bush doesn't need to make the outcome of the 2004 elections dependent on finding the most comforable things to say about gay marriage. He needs to make the issues into the economy, which is recovering, and terrorism, which many voters blame for tanking the 2001 recovery, anyway. He needs to make the mushy middle comfortable that he's in charge, and that Howard Dean is a hothead, full of himself, and the Rats that run with him as obstructionists that are not good partners in rebuilding this country. He can fight gay marriage better with clear majorities in Congress, who were elected because the mushy middle didn't fear a theocracy. If the fight against gay marriage is winnable, then the President needs every tool he can get in his belt, and he needs there to be relatively weak cases for gay marriage working their way through the courts. He doesn't need a "full faith and credit" Constitutional case to have to fight, just a bunch of gay rights groups claiming unfairness. He needs to have courts that can see a middle ground available, so that tradition can be maintained.
It's way too late for Vermont, I think we will both agree. I contend that it's also way too late for Massachusetts. Do we contain this decision there, or do we set up a situation that gets us, Roe vs. Wade style, gay marriage in all fifty states?
I just do not believe the legislature or the people of Ma have the will the go thru with gay marriage. For goodness sakes it 99% catholic how are they going to reconcile? There is going to be other fights that come up on this issue and I don't want to afford the Lib courts any slack so it is clear cut which way they should rule.
It's no different than giving drug addicts needles, teenages condoms, or smokes for votes. We need to be trying to change hearts on this and you're not going to do that by setting up some guise which is supposed to act as a middle ground. Your idea will only strengthen their movement.
I really believe it would be in the repubs and the country's best interest to stop this now! The culture war is huge...and the gay issue is the main root cause of it's decline.
I really don't think conservatives will have any problems in MA because the people are gonna blow this gay marriage issue to smithereens...