... and even if it's a sham.
This interesting article in the Guardian looks at the case of former New Jersey Governor, James McGreevey, who recently resigned from the Governorship during a press conference called for the purpose. Mr McGreevey also announced that he was gay.
Like many gay men (and women, too) he has been married for many years to the same woman and it is speculated that she may have known all along of her husband's confused sexuality (the article suggests this is what Mrs McGreevey's own mother believed to be the case). And if this arrangement works for these two people, then good luck to them.
It would be much simpler, though, and echoing the point the article is making, if gay men and women could marry someone of the same gender, if a suitable person is met, so that the heterosexual spouse can get on and marry another heterosexual. Of course I have nothing against 'mixed' marriages, but in the case of heterosexual/homosexual liaisons society generally, and the religious right in particular, do seem to have pretty curious views on what is good for the individuals concerned, far less society as a whole, as such liaisons are very often (although perhaps not in this case) based on deception.
Is this really something to be encouraged in a healthy society? Wouldn't it be much simpler to let gay people marry and not coerce them into a social conformity which very often leads to long-term unhappiness for both parties and for their progeny, if there are any? These double-standards have, at the very least, in this case resulted in Mr McGreevey's resignation; I have no idea whether he was any good as Governor or not, but if he was performing well just why was it deemed necessary for him to resign?