Trying my patience

Since the 2006 passage of the Marriage Amendment to the Tennessee State Constitution, I've generally avoided much discussion of marriage equality. In my mind, the question is pretty much moot in Tennessee for at least a generation. While I welcome the California Supreme Court decision on equal access to marriage, it may be years before that impact is felt in Tennessee and other states that have passed oppressive marriage amendments in the last decade.

However, I was taken aback by an uniformed opinion in The Chattanoogan about one marriage equality opponent's concern about the full faith and credit clause of the U.S. Constitution leading to Tennessee recognition of marriages from California:

It is time that all the states left in this great country who hold to morality and the fact that marriage has always been defined as between one man and one woman stand up and amend their state constitutions banning this abuse of the Constitution. If you are for gay marriage we have two states for you now, California and New York. If you are still in love with Tennessee then call your representative or state senator. It needs to be defined before it is redefined for you. A state law is not sufficient; it must be in the state constitution. . . .

This guy is apparently a late-comer to anti-marriage activism since he doesn't seem to realize that the Tennessee constitution already forbids recognition of marriage between two people of the same sex. Isn't it frustrating when your bigoted opponents can't even be bothered to educate themselves about an issue?

After reading that thoughtless piece, I did enjoy a column on the Root about why African Americans should support equal access to marriage in this country.