An excerpt from today’s post on …or does it explode?
To make it clear I am against discrimination of any kind, but to oppose the oppression without analysis of the fight back is not scientific and not conducive to progressive results. A similar case can be found in the debate over “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.” (DADT) Of course I want equality but I also will not hold back in discussing that entering the army means entering an institution, bankrupt of morality, that serves as the state imperialist arm as it seeks to find capital through expansion, genocide, and exploitation. We must have open criticism to have a successful movement, because all oppression and exploitation is connected under the world capitalist system and we cannot afford to gain at the cost of others.
Does this now mean that I am against gay marriage and should join the West Borough Baptist Church as the claim that god hates fags? No. That’s the same foolishness and dogma, which draws these “pro gay”/ “anti gay” binaries, that has kept the discussion and critical thought at a minimum. This entire posting merely means that I am against the state objectification of social relations for the strengthening of capital. If people choose to couple monogamously that is their choice as is the opposite. However, bourgeois society has conditioned us to think negatively of the latter and believe that the former is perfected in a union under the state. And since the battle for liberation is also a battle for transformative thought, it is a dis-service to the movement to remain silent.
Sadhu/ Amen/ Well said.
Kloncke 
Excellent thoughts, but these are important issues for thos who simply want to live in the as-it-is now world.
I hear you, Roger — and I left a comment on the original post engaging some of Crunch’s other great insights on the ambivalence between sympathetic joy for people who gain from the decision, and compassionate criticism that keeps us working toward changes that will benefit *all* people in meaningful ways.