I've always wondered about the use of "bleeding heart" as a perjorative. It seems to me that the only way one's heart wouldn't bleed is if it were made of stone. I guess that may be what conservatives prefer - to close their hearts off and not have any compassion for others; to not give a damned about anyone else other than folks that happen to be and think just like them or (maybe) those who are in their immediate family. Personally, I am glad that my heart bleeds, if having a stone heart is the alternative.

Unfortunately, when you talk about civil rights -and yes, this is a civil rights issue- the majority of the electorate is often all too quick to deny people in minorities their inalienable rights. I need not go through the litany of historical examples. Fortunately, the Consitution has something to say about the rights of individuals, regardless of what the majority believes.

As for a changing definition of marriage... The institution of marriage, and the idea of the family more broadly, has been continuously changing ever since people first tried to define it and restrict it with legalisms. It used to be that inter-racial marriage was banned; at one point there was no option of divorce; it used to be that women were considered the property of their husbands; polygamy used to be legal. The definition has changed over the ages, and it continues to.

When you get right down to it, denying gay couples the same legal rights and economic benefits of their hetero counterparts is discrimination - pure and simple.

And just because people used to get away with discriminating for a long time doesn't make it right. For God's sake, love your neighbor!