Yes, but that’s a religious issue. The government still recognizes any second marriage of a Catholic as a marriage. Just like no church has formally recognized my marriage, and yet I’m still married.

I think that we will see civil unions for same-sex couples nationally in my lifetime. I would also like to think that we’ll have same-sex marriage as well. What the whole “gay marriage” debacle has showed is that people are extraordinarily attached to the word “marriage.” So attached that lots of people who think that same-sex couples should have the right to form legal relationships don’t want them to call it “marriage.” That position confuses me most of all, but it’s a very popular one. Personally, I can see people being more willing to share the title of marriage than give it up for themselves. I imagine that the religious would be the most upset, even though it would affect them the least. But a lot of non-religious couples would be upset, too. I think it’s ridiculous that this whole debacle is over a stupid word. But it is.

So I think that they’re two different questions. In my view, your argument is correct in so far as opposition to gay marriage and civil unions is losing popularity. Civil unions among same-sex couples are gaining popularity. Other than you, a couple of op-ed writers, and maybe Barack Obama, depending on how you interpret some of his comments, I don’t hear anyone talking about doing away with marriage as a legal concept for straight people. I’m not sure what states you expect to try to get straight people to give up the title of marriage, but I sure haven’t heard of them.

I think at the point where a certain number of states act on their own (not, however, being willing to posit a number as the tipping point) there will be immense pressure for a Federal statute or constitutional amendment.

I honestly think that the exit polling data from the 2004 election–especially in Ohio, which is a key state–shows pretty strongly that his “defense of marriage” position and the ballot initiative there did not benefit George W. and may have actually cost him votes.

It is already the case that a divorced Catholic without an annulment decree can only have a marriage that is a civil union, because the church won’t recognize that marriage–and there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of Catholics out there in that position.

Here’s my constitutional amendment:

“The right of two consenting adults to a civil union shall not be infringed. All ceremonies of civil marriage performed prior to the adoption of this amendment shall be considered civil unions under the law, and all rights and privileges previously pertaining to marriage shall henceforth pertain to civil unions.”