the paradigm of glorious compromise we must seek. He and his boosters were pretty self certain that LGBT wanting simple equality were 'refusing to compromise' and not being 'pragmatic'. He and his bootsers were straight people who had all their rights 'You people should give up your rights so I can get something from my Republican friends' is what they suggested. They wanted to use us as their trading chit, call that compromise and end they day with long sessions of self congratulations.

There are moments for compromise and also moments where any compromise is capitulation. That's how life really is. It's not always possible to meet in the middle. Slavery. Should we make co? What's the compromise on reproductive choice? What's the compromise on 'My religion says you can't pee in the men's room'?

Compromise is a nice thing but to claim it is always possible is to toss all ethics to the wind.