TRIBUNE'S CHAPMAN BACKS WRONG SIDE IN GAY MARRIAGE DEBATE

Steve Chapman in his opposition piece (Overreaching on gay marriage, August 7) reminds me of the faux progressive defenders of Jim Crow laws in the 1950's who agonized that the attempt to legislate equality from the bench would backfire because you cannot change racists' hearts and minds that way. Chapman is deeply troubled that the federal circuit court decision allowing gay marriage in California and a possible Supreme Court decision allowing it nationwide "would spark a furious backlash from Americans who...think such decisions belong with them and their elected representatives". So when it comes to granting gays marriage equality and relief from second class status, versus assuaging the feelings of homophobes, he comes down in favor of the homophobes, just like his forebears came down in favor of the racists.

But the corker is when Chapman frets about granting gays the right to marry a single same sex partner but not granting polygamists the right to multiple wives. It's unfair, he argues since it denies the polygamist's claim to a natural right to multiple wives just as banning gay marriage denies the gay's natural right to a single same sex spouse. That is utter nonsense. Even Chapman is careful not to use the usual homophobe's canard that same sex marriage will lead to an avalanche of men seeking their Constitutional right to marry a goat. Substitute goats for multiple wives as a non-sensical social wrong that must be corrected along with the very real social wrong of denying same sex marriage, and you come off as a fool. But as goats don't cut it for denying same sex marriage, neither does polygamy.

Chapman, who says he supports gay marriage, is trying his best to push back this long overdue reform for another generation.