Why do gays need a Big Government hug? Column

Bruce Carroll | USATODAY

By the reaction of the gay political activists, one would have thought that gay Americans weren't allowed in schools, restaurants, or voting booths until the Supreme Court decision Wednesday. Strangely, I don't feel like the world changed and I certainly don't feel more or less of an American after the ruling.

As a gay conservative, I've always been conflicted about the issue of gay marriage. I guess it is because my political and moral philosophies are not dictated by the desire to be loved by the president or the federal government. I believe that my rights as an American citizen come from my Creator, not Barack Obama, John Roberts or Nancy Pelosi. But the reaction from most gay liberals today to the overturning of the Defense of Marriage Act and reversing the California voters' decision in Proposition 8 has been the opposite. The gay political class is celebrating Big Government waving its haughty approval like King George III waving his hand over his colonies.

In the words of our current ruler, "Let me be clear." If someone wants to engage in a civil contract with someone they love, nothing stopped them from doing so last week. I have consistently urged that public policy adopt civil unions with strong religious liberty protections as a balance to resolve the gay marriage issue. Instead, the gay political class decided that they would expend all their energy, time and millions of dollars for the last decade quarreling over the word "marriage." Bravo.

The Defense of Marriage Act, a relic of the Clinton years, does seem to me to be incompatible with the equal protection clause of the Constitution. However, I wish the DOMA Supreme Court majority, with its newfound love of federalism, had judged ObamaCare with equal vigor and consistency.

However, the Court's decision to invalidate the voters' decision in California puzzles me. I don't agree with Prop 8 on its face, nor the referendum system itself that California has. But it is completely inconsistent with federalism to revoke the citizens' vote on an issue based on a technicality as the court did. If Californians want to change their mind on gay marriage, as 13 states have in the past decade, they should have that right and vote again.

So what is next after this arduous fight over the word "marriage" for the gay progressives? Morally, the next step for the gay political movement should be to recognize the threat to unborn gays and lesbians from abortion resulting from the advancement in genetic testing. Or maybe demand that America stop giving aid to or loaning money to Islamic-led governments that hang gays in public on street lamps as official punishment.

But that won't happen. The gay political movement is bound and gagged to the progressive left. So instead, we will see demands for public accommodations for gays and infringement upon the religious liberty of many faiths. I am confident that this attorney general, or the next one, and the Obama IRS, will put pressure on churches and synagogues to marry gay and lesbians. After all, there is a track record of such behavior over the past four years.

So for those of my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters who needed the federal government's emotional approval of their relationship: Congratulations. I just hope all gay and lesbian Americans take a moment to stop and thank Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush for nominating Justices Kennedy and Roberts so the Clinton era of discrimination could come to an end Wednesday.

Bruce Carroll is the blogger-in-chief at GayPatriot.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors.