While I appreciate Mark Kirk for a number of reasons, his rationale on gay marriage is shallow and simplistic. It is not just about "who you love and who loves you back," which epitomizes the self-centeredness of today's society, but rather the stability and future growth of the American society. We have heard this is about the benefits that married couples get that gay unions don't get, however the tax codes are filled with benefits for people that millions of other people are not entitled to, so that argument just doesn't wash.
Maybe people should stop complaining about what they don't get and start appreciating what they do have, since complaining about what you don't have leads to a lifetime of unhappiness. Will the next visit to the Supreme Court be about changing the meaning of "traditional" to include any and everything rendering the word meaningless?
Martin J. Uttich