I dont know a lot of history, but I know that that principle was used a lot to justify segregation in the South of the US. Separate, but equal.
And, in Apartheid South Africa, that was the rallying call. The races could be 'separate but equal'.
In the previous post, a christian in Uganda argues about how sinful my relationship is. My relationship with my lover, my partner of 7 years. He will not countenance that we love one another, me and my partner. And, well, many christians will continue seeing my love as a pervesion.
But a court of law in Connecticut, a state of the US has declined to agree that a relationship like mine, is very different from marriage. Just because I am homosexual. Just because I and my lover are gay.
Kudos to the judges on the Connecticut bench. I may be very far off in Uganda, but I am encouraged. It will not stop the gay bashing in Uganda, the hate speech, and the demonising, but it is something to look forwards to. That, ultimately, the assertion that we are also human is something which the beliefs of some will not hold back. Because we are human. We deserve to be treated as humans.
Kudos to gay people in Connecticut. You have fought a good fight, you have won, Good for you.
There is no substitute, the justices ruled 4-3 as they made the state the nation's third to allow same-sex weddings.
The ruling might not have been as earthshaking as the one in Massachusetts that allowed gay marriage for the first time in the U.S., or the one in California that made it legal on the other side of the country and in the nation's most populous state. But it cut into the view that there is some solid middle ground on an issue that has inflamed passions on both sides.
"It's another court saying that separate but equal is not OK," said Edward Stein, a professor at the Cardozo School of Law in New York City. "As state courts start to say this ... gradually, over time, there might be a consensus that emerges."