Captain Obvioius: It's Not About the Word "Marriage"

In nearly every vote in every state to "protect marriage" (which is first a misnomer, and second shouldn't be up for a vote in the first place), one of the common arguments is that "marriage" is only for a man and a woman.  Words--apparently--are ironclad and never change, and it certainly shouldn't be up to homos to "redefine" the word.  This argument will quickly be followed up by oh-so-sincere declarations that civil unions would be fine, and that the problem is with the word marriage. 

I've known this was a bogus argument for a long time, as surely as I know that religion is an excuse that is a cover for (as Mike Huckabee put it) the "ick" factor.  But that's a different argument for a different Captain Obvious column.  What evidence do I have, you might ask, that would prove that this is about more than the word marriage?  Well, first there was the "everything but marriage" act in Washington State. The same forces that have marshaled against same-sex marriage used the exact same arguments in Washington, even though it was not marriage being proposed there. And in Hawaii, just yesterday, it happened again.

[Excerpt]

Hawaii's governor vetoes same-sex civil unions

Hawaii's governor vetoed legislation Tuesday that would have permitted same-sex civil unions, ending weeks of speculation about what she would do with the contentious, emotionally charged issue. . .

Read more at: Los Angeles Times