Several months ago, we had the Mayor of San Francisco in for a small lunch with about eight of us. He spoke passionately about his support for gay marriage, and gave several compelling facts, especially about states who took a long time to overturn laws banning inter-racial marriage...Alabama was the last one to do so, in November 2000 (!) And even then, 40% of the voters in Alabama voted to keep the inter-racial marriage ban.

One of Mayor Newsom's points was that he is maybe just a bit ahead of his time on gay marriage; in 30-40 years, maybe it will be just as acceptable as inter-racial.

For a long time, I have believed (and still do) that gay people should have the right to marry. The question that resonates most with me: Who does more damage to the institution of marriage, Hollywood celebrities and the absurd frequency with which they marry and divorce (including Britney Spears and her under-24-hour marriage) or "Mary and Sue" or "Bob and Tom" who have been in long-term, monogamous multi-decade relationships?

Last night on NPR, a gay marriage proponent said that gays simply want the same rights as heterosexuals have for marriage, whether it be man, woman, or toaster.

But here is an added complication: A friend and business partner who happens to be Mormon, who is adamantly *opposed* to polygamy AND gay marriage, pointed out to me that if you are going to allow gay marriage, and let consenting adults marry whom they please, then you better allow polygamy, in order to be consistent. I had always been "against" polygamy, mostly because of the horror stories that are associated with it (see recent LA Times articles on Hilldale and Colorado City, and Krakauer's excellent book, "Under the Banner of Heaven.") But what about Polygamist marriages where everyone truly consents, kids are not mis-treated, and the family functions fine in society?

A question is, what precedent is set by allowing gay marriage? Is it simply and narrowly that "gays can marry"; or is it that "consenting adults can marry," as Shakira might say, "whenever, wherever" and how-many-ever they want?

My initial take is "government hands off, as long as it's *consenting* adults, let people make their own decisions about who and how many they marry." But one problem with that approach is that there are tax consequences associated with marital status affecting all US taxpayers, which simply cannot be ignored.

I'd be interested in what readers think about this topic...