Listen to Ross and Burbank weekdays on KIRO Radio 97.3 FM
 Ross+Burbank


Most popular
Help us build a Fisher House
Bonneville Seattle is raising funds for the construction of a second Fisher House at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Tacoma and we need your help.
gaymarriage5el2012640.jpg
Washington state voters stand poised to become the first in the nation to approve same-sex marriage, with polls showing R-74 enjoying widespread support heading into election day. And KIRO Radio's Luke Burbank couldn't be more thrilled. (AP image)

Luke: Gay marriage is inevitable

BY Josh Kerns  on November 6, 2012 @ 12:51 pm (Updated: 2:24 pm - 11/6/12 )

Washington state voters stand poised to become the first in the nation to approve same-sex marriage with polls showing R-74 enjoying widespread support heading into election day. KIRO Radio's Luke Burbank couldn't be more thrilled.

"I want to say I am from the first state in America where the popular vote has affirmed the right of two same-sex people to marry," Burbank says. But even if the polls are wrong, Burbank argues gay marriage is inevitable. He has a message for opponents.

"You can dig your heels in, but this country is moving towards broader acceptance of gay people and I think it's a great thing. And whether or not 74 passes this time around, gay marriage will be legal in this country very, very soon."

Washington is one of four states with same-sex marriage measures on the ballot. Maine and Maryland are voting to legalize it, while a referendum in Minnesota would make same-sex marriage unconstitutional.

But Burbank argues the tide is turning as more people realize gays are no threat to their own lives, especially when they learn people they know or love are gay.

"When people come up against the reality of knowing a gay person or being related to a gay person, they find out usually pretty quickly 'Oh yeah, they're pretty much exactly like me, a non-gay person.'"

Co-host Dave Ross agrees and he's baffled by people who worry so much about homosexuality.

"They think it spreads. You allow gay marriage and suddenly it would change the gene pool in some way." Ross says. "I want to reassure them that while homosexual couples do indeed have children, at some point, they have to mate with a female in one way or another, so there's really no danger of homosexuality somehow spreading in the gene pool, unless God wants it to happen."

Burbank puts it more bluntly to those concerned of the spread of homosexuality.

"I would ask them, 'Would it be possible for me to talk you into having sex with a man, sir?' The answer would be 'not on your life.'"

After talking at length with his 18-year-old daughter, Burbank is convinced the younger generation is far more tolerant and accepting of gay marriage, a trend he predicts will ultimately lead all states to approve it.

"We will look back ten years from now and we will ask ourselves 'How ever was it the case that two loving adults weren't allowed to marry each other?' We're just going to be amazed that was the law here," he says.

Josh Kerns, MyNorthwest.com Reporter
Josh Kerns is co-host of KIRO Radio's Seattle Sounds (Saturday nights 7-8) and a digital content producer for MyNorthwest.com.
More Ross and Burbank

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (13)


  • Add A Comment

  • mnpat wrote...
    Do it then the way the constitution was designed for....
    November 6, 2012 2:00 pm
    Pass an amendment instead of bypassing it like they did on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Health Care.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cigarfan wrote...
    @mnpat
    November 6, 2012 3:41 pm
    It's already covered under the 14th amendment. That's what struck California's prop 8.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    Thank god Luke and Dave did another Gay marriage topic-we can now forget about the economy, state debt, national debt and unemployment.
    November 6, 2012 7:08 pm
    Please let it pass so I dont have to hear the sactimonious rants from Dave and Luke about something that effects so very few. Oh-Luke I voted for gay marriage so I must be a good person.****what so great about marriage anyway???
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Sean wrote...
    "Broader acceptance" of gay people, Luke?
    November 6, 2012 5:26 pm
    Most people I know couldn't possibly be more accepting of gay people. You apparently are blind to the difference between acceptance of homosexuality and redefining a word. Can you simply not grasp this concept? "Marriage" is a term that holds very significant and fundamental meaning (having nothing to do with religion in many people's minds) and when the gay community got their "everything but marriage" acceptance, they weren't satisfied. Talk about intolerance; it's unbelievable. The gay community seems to want to be seen as exactly the same in every way -- intolerant and I accepting of their own clear and fundamental difference from heterosexual couples. He sad for THEM! They're widely accepted by the huge majority yet they cannot live with that. My god, why do we even differentiate anymore between male and female? Lets redefine that too! I for one will not be proud, if it turns out that way, to be from a state that so blatantly disregards obvious differences in this issue that is so integral to The Family -- and even you won't argue, Luke, that the disintegration of the family has hurt this country significantly in the last 3-4-5 decades. It's just continues the slide. What your side won't admit is that it isn't the RIGHTS you want -- AND ALREADY HAVE -- it's the changing of a definition of an important word and concept because you cant accept your own difference. Can you even admit THAT?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cigarfan wrote...
    @Sean
    November 6, 2012 5:57 pm
    There are certain rights you cannot get unless you are married. You are mistaken about some of them. Just because critics of Marriage equality assert someone already has a right, doesn't mean it's true. Hospitals, Social security, Military, Insurance plans do not recognize certain rights outside of Marriage. Please learn this.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    I am baffled why people think we are so worried about Homosexuality?
    November 6, 2012 5:58 pm
    What I am worried about is those who reject morals and God and push for same sex unions to be recognized as Marriage. Marriage is a sacrament from God between ONE man and ONE woman. This will NEVER change! You Liberals may get this Liberal government to recognize same sex unions as such Marriage simply for your votes and as long as it lasts.

    After talking at length with his 18-year-old daughter, Burbank is convinced the younger generation is far more tolerant and accepting of gay marriage, a trend he predicts will ultimately lead all states to approve it.

    This attitude still does not make it any less of a Sin in God's eyes.

    "When a truth becomes as a lie and a lie becomes the truth" Our contry is on the verge of trouble!

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • eee3 wrote...
    Ah Freedom
    November 6, 2012 6:40 pm
    Freedom from your religion. Keep it in your church and out of our public, civic and legal institutions.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • FormerMarineSgt wrote...
    @it's me!.....
    November 7, 2012 6:30 am
    "Marriage is a sacrament from God between ONE man and ONE woman." You are confusing religious marriage with legal marriage. One is sponsored by the religion of the couple getting married - that one can be whatever that religion defines it as. The Christian version IS NOT the only religious definition of marriage. There are MANY equally valid definitions of religious marriage in this world. You cannot legitimately claim supremecy of your religion over the rest, based merely on 'I'm Christian, therefore my religion is the only valid one and it's the only valid definition of religious marriage'. LEGAL marriage is and always has been seperate from religious marriage. Legal marriage must comply with the Constitution. Forcing your version of religious marriage to be the legal version violates the Constitution on two levels - seperation of church and state and the equal protection under the law clauses. You can have your religious version, but don't pretend that because you believe one way that everyone else must legally bow down to your way.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    eee3
    November 6, 2012 7:29 pm
    Freedom is EXACTLY what I am about. I do not want to be forced to accept as special the Homosexual lifestyle. Nobody is stopping Homosexuals from being married. Any Justice of the peace or non denominational church will join any couple in state sanctioned marriage. But as is the case most of you people will refuse to accept this or simply cannot accept this.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • eee3 wrote...
    The state
    November 6, 2012 7:35 pm
    needs to stay out of it by allowing same sex marriage...and not discriminating. You don't have to personally accept it...but we collectively have a Constitutional duty to accept it. By the way - if same sex marriage had been approved 5 years ago, would you have even noticed? How would your life change? I have a brother who is gay. I have a cousin who is a lesbian. I have many gay friends. This is simply right.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • BeenThere wrote...
    Even with the new marriage law.
    November 7, 2012 12:14 am
    It still excludes, still discriminates.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • FormerMarineSgt wrote...
    @beenthere
    November 7, 2012 6:34 am
    wow dude. If you want to claim that the new law STILL discriminates, then go do the hard work to get that discrimination removed. Just remember that the usual arguements used in this 'it still discriminates' are lies. The person who raises them as 'it still discriminates against _____ marriage' nearly always would never actually support '_____ marriage' but is using it to fling accusations of discrimination, hypocracy, etc. etc. Just remember that you cannot legalize any form of marriage where all parties involved cannot freely give legal consent to do so. This requirement eliminates all but one or two forms of marriage that get raised by folks like you. If you truly want any of these other forms of marriage - go do the hard work - like the gay marriage supporters have. Don't sit there and whine. They didn't - and look what they've achieved.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Nomad7314 wrote...
    Laws
    November 7, 2012 5:49 am
    Even if/when this law is affirmed, the IRS will still not recognize the marriage for tax purposes.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }