>>Do you think it was progress when they repealed their Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act? Or did it help lead to gay marriage? What should the rules be? one man and one woman of the same race, same religion (no athiests), willing and able to have children?
>>
>>>Sure, if you call that progress. As a next step, perhaps they will be even more progressive and legalize marriage with pets.
>
>I don't think the civil right movement and gay marriage thing is exactly the same thing.
>
>http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/03/07/gay_marriage_isnt_civil_rights/

One thing I found in that article to be plausible - MLK probably didn't even bother to think about gay marriage. It wasn't an issue at all, and one can surely conclude that he didn't approve of it.

The rest of the article, IMO, is just author's opinions. And the argument that civil rights was about "restoring what was granted in the law" - well, the law grants equal rights, doesn't it?