Reply #14: What's the alternative? [View All]

Making it a federal issue, in which case the federal govt wouldn't allow same-sex unions in ANY state? Given the choice between the two, I'd rather have this on a state by state basis than a federal law right now.

When done on a state by state basis, the people of, say, Vermont were brave enough to allow for this. The people of MA, seeing that it did not, in fact, cause the gates of hell to open up, became more receptive to it. It's now legal in MA and is generally accepted, so there's not overwhelming support to overturn this. As people become educated about what actually will or won't happen (as opposed to the doom-and-gloom scenarios the religious right put it), it will spread to other states.

If we were waiting on the federal government to do it, it would not allowed anywhere, and we wouldn't even have these examples of states that have tried it to support the argument that it should be legal.