As I've debated so-called same-sex "marriage" over the years I have come across well meaning moderate friends who don't necessarily want to completely redefine marriage but are open to "civil unions".
I've mentioned on those occasions that, among a long list of problems with granting special privileges for people based on their sexual preferences, Leftist advocates will use this appeasement by marriage moderates against them.
In swoops the Obama Administration to make my point for me. Recently the Obama Department of Justice filed a brief with the SCOTUS in favor of so-called same-sex "marriage" in the California Prop. 8 case.
In that brief the Obama administration argues that because California recognizes domestic partnerships and civil unions but refuses to give marriage licenses to same-sex couples, the State of California is discriminating against same-sex couples and should be forced to recognize so-called same-sex "marriage" (SCOTUS blog backs me up). In federal district court openly homosexual Judge Vaughn Walker gave basically the same argument when he ruled against marriage.
California gave "GLBT" activists almost everything they wanted. All the rights of marriage short of the name? You got it. Public recognition? You got it. But when California balked at changing the definition of what marriage is, their herculean works of appeasement were used as weapons against them, both in federal court under openly homosexual Judge Vaughn Walker and again by the Obama Administration.
Support for creating special rights based on sexual preferences of any kind is a gift in the Left's war on marriage. You cannot be pro-"civil unions" and pro-marriage. If marriage is to be protected, creating these sorts of legal structures meant for compromise with "GLBT" activists must be avoided. As the Obama Administration and Judge Walker have shown us: Marriage moderates will be punished.