French same-sex partnership law passes

[Marc Stern]

It is possible to be so certain of ones views on sexual morality (same sex
marriages) that one believes no alternative vision ought to be tolerated.
That is, one can insist as does Rick Duncan that same sex marriages are
morally intolerable altogether and ought never to be tolerated in any form.
His critics insist that there is no moral difference between homosexual and
heterosexual; relationships and ought to be allowed on the same terms. My
question is (and I think this was what Michael McConnell was getting at) is
whether it is possible for both views to coexist in the legal system; that is
we will allow some form of same sex marriage(relationships) to achieve
official recognition without compelling other s to accept those relationships
as moral or binding. This would obviously be easier to do if we had national
health insurance instead of private employer based insuurance(since health
insurance benefits often are at the heart of disputes over gay marriages. My
question also is at the heart of the debate over a civil rights exemption in
the proposed RLPA
Marc Stern