Whatever one's views on homosexual "marriage," I hope we can agree that civil unions are perhaps the most pernicious public policy idea currently floating about. I happen to think that permitting homosexuals to "marry" will be yet another significant step in the abolition of marriage and ultimately Western civil society, but assuming we have to have one or the other, it seems "marriage" would be preferable to civil unions. At least in the case of the former the damage would be limited to a subset of 2-3% of the country's population. Sure, the cultural effect would be much magnified beyond the number of people involved, but it would be so much worse with civil unions. If civil unions become law in several states, they will eventually be extended to straight couple as well, and this revolution in the way society treats marriage and families will extend directly to the whole population. My guess is marriage would disappear as a positive social force within 2 generations. Assuming, that is, that we haven't all been blown up by a series of Chinese nuclear bombs within 2 generations.
