So California finally got their shit together, and in 30 days same-sex couples will have the right to marry. The Schwartz says he won't veto this time. It could potentially get fucked up in November, if conservative groups get an amendment to the state's constitution on the ballot. But, let's be honest--what can't get fucked up in November?
I have a hobby, which is to try to stake out a unique position on partisan issues that I view as having become too polarized (meaning, predictable) to provide me with the level of entertainment necessary to keep me interested and engaged in the public discourse. Basically, if I simply take the 'left' position, any time the topic comes up I am limited to an already well-established set of arguments, and consistently encounter the exact same counter-arguments. Boooooo-ring.
On the issue of same-sex marriage, my position is this: The state should not recognize same-sex marriage. Additionally, I don't think that the state should recognize hetero marriages, either. Marriage is idiosyncratic and personal. All of the legal functions that a spouse serves could be handled by a partner of your choice. You could update your partner online, just like you update your address with the DMV. Seriously, how easy is that!?
However, there is your ideal position, and then there is your real-life position that is informed by the conditions present in the real world. So, of course I think this is a good thing.