Tuesday's election results showed that 52 percent of Maryland voters bought the "fairness" argument those proponents of the state's same-sex marriage law used.
That was the percentage who voted for Question 6, the referendum that allowed the same-sex marriage law the Maryland legislature passed earlier this year to stand. Opponents of the law managed to get enough signatures on a petition to take the matter to referendum, but during the campaign it was hard to find a pro-Question 6 ad that didn't have the "f" word -- "fairness" -- in it.
Now it becomes my sad duty to inform those Marylanders who voted for Question 6 that this wasn't about "fairness" at all, but about overhauling the institution of marriage -- and society -- in such a radical way that we might not recognize either in the future.
The overhaul started long before Question 6 got on the ballot, and long before the Maryland legislature passed the law legalizing same-sex marriage earlier this year. The catchphrase of Question 6 supporters -- "marriage equality" -- might have fooled many into thinking that the law merely allows gay and lesbian couples to marry. But it does far more.
As I've written before, there is no longer a gay and lesbian rights movement. There is now what is called the lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender -- LGBT -- movement, and it's expanding.
The May 18 edition of the Huffington Post contained an article with this title, one that shows where the institution of marriage will soon be headed: "Should Groups Like Asexuals and the Polyamorous Be Included Under The Queer Umbrella?"
For the uninitiated, "polyamorous" people are defined as "those interested in relationships of one type or another with more than one partner." In any true, genuine sense, "marriage equality" would have to accommodate the polyamorous. On the Showtime television network, there is indeed a show titled "Polyamory: Married & Dating." There is at least one website dedicated to New York City's gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgender-polyamorist community.
Before all the supporters of the LGBT community -- and the LGBT community itself -- try to whip out the "homophobe" card on me, I'll state this: I'm all for gays and lesbians climbing aboard the equal rights train.
It's who they're bringing with them I have a problem with.
Enter "Colleen" Francis, flashing his family jewels.
Francis is a transgender man who identifies himself as a woman, and according to the strict rules of political correctness members of the LGBT community and their supporters have crammed down our throats, I'm supposed to refer to Francis as "she." But Francis still has testicles and a penis.
Recently, Evergreen State College in Washington allowed Francis, 45, to use the women's locker room. And there's a problem with that. It isn't just women who use the locker room. The swim team from a nearby high school also uses the locker room, as well as girls from a children's swim academy.
Some horrified parents -- no doubt homophobes all -- expressed shock that Francis used the locker room and was so carelessly attired -- in some cases not attired at all -- that some of the girls caught a glimpse of his genitalia as he used the locker room.
College officials defended the decision to let Francis use the women's locker room by citing a Washington state law that forbids discrimination on the basis of "gender identity."
That must come as a shock to those girls and their parents who have the silly notion that females are supposed to have female genitalia, and males male genitalia.
Is such nonsense as what's going on at Evergreen State College part of a package deal when we buy into same-sex marriage? Gays and lesbians will have to convince me. They can start by booting "Colleen" off the equality train.
Examiner Columnist Gregory Kane is a Pulitzer-nominated news and opinion journalist who has covered people and politics from Baltimore to the Sudan.