I tend to agree.
I do think that Gays should have the right to enter into legally recognized relationships that provide certain legal protections and rights that parallel those afforded marriage.
If the laws governing civil unions do not adequately provide these rights and protections it should be a much easier and less controversial effort to correct this as opposed to challenging the centuries old definition of "marriage."
So why is it so important for Gays to be able to be "married?"
The answer is entirely political.
There are two primary motives behind the movement to legalize Gay marriage:
1) The imposition of a sea change in societal values
2) The perceived defeat of conservative values
Clearly the vast majority of Americans believe that marriage should be limited to one man and one woman. If this were not the case, the vast majority of Democratic politicians across the nation would not be telling us they hold the same belief.
Thus, we know American society is not poised to accept gay marriage if not for the sinister machinations of the Religious Right. We also know that, ironically, two voting blocs the Democrats count on as their own (Blacks and Hispanics) are less accepting of gay marriage than the general populace.
So, it's not about legal rights, it's about societal acceptance, and that cannot be legislated by elected representatives or mandated by appointed judges.
In the fight for matching the legal right of Gay civil unions with those of straight marriages, I line up with the Gays.
Whether or not, as a society, we should accept homosexuality as being as "normal" as heterosexuality, we certainly should not be forced to by courts, politicians or activists.
The proponents of Gay marriage are, in general, deliberately masking their agenda for social change with disingenuous claims about legal equality.
Progress is not defined as the unalterable dismantling of tradition, as so many "Progressives" would have us believe.