For all of life’s odd coincidences, I never expected to find so many similarities between a local punk rock show and the present state of gay marriage.

In both situations, someone missed the point.

Last weekend I was taking pictures of a punk band at a Charleston bar when the camera’s battery died.

I had photographed the band before the show but when the camera stopped working, I was worried I would miss the band’s performance, the main event. I would miss the point of photographing the band: to see them actually play.

By the time I found the battery charger and made it back to the bar, the show was almost over. The band had only one full song left to perform so I quickly snapped a few pictures and cheered as the show ended.

I looked around. The crowd was jumping around; they were alive from watching the band play a complete set.

I had missed the point. I had missed out on the energy of the entire show and was left wondering why I hadn’t been more careful to make sure the camera’s battery was completely charged before I left home that night.

The Massachusetts Legislature also missed the point. I wonder if the state’s lawmakers will look back soon and wonder why they weren’t more careful not to control the rights of homosexuals.

The Legislature passed a proposal last week for an amendment that would give same-sex couples living within the state the right to form civil unions. The unions wouldn’t be called marriages, but they would carry all the same benefits.

The amendment must again be approved by legislators during the 2005-2006 Congressional session before voters can weigh in on the constitutional change.

The Legislature’s vote contradicts the state’s Supreme Judicial Court ruling that would allow gay unions in Massachusetts to be deemed marriages after May 17.

Massachusetts, your courts are brave but your lawmakers are not.

The Supreme Court realized that our country has not done well in the past making things separate but equal. The court’s justices even included some of that reflection in the formal court opinion in February.

Even if civil unions guarantee comparable rights to marriage, they are not equal because the unions deny homosexuals the right to call it marriage.

The Massachusetts Legislature isn’t seeing it. They are missing the smiles of thousands who formed marriages, not civil unions, in San Francisco, Portland, Ore. and elsewhere as parts of the country decided anything short of legalized marriage for homosexual couples was unconstitutional.

Since marriage is deemed such an important institution in our society, civil unions will never be completely equal if they remain separate from it. The unions will always be something different.

“If marriage is a key social institution, then it’s a key social institution in all 50 states,” said Maggie Gallagher in the Chicago Tribune March 30. “To say that we have radically different definitions of marriage is to say that it isn’t a key social institution.”

Gallagher is president of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy.

At least 34 states have recommended anti-gay proposals to either amend their constitutions or strengthen statutes against same-sex marriage, the Tribune reported.

Find out the differences between gay marriage and civil unions and contact the politicians that determine whether or not to offer homosexuals equal rights. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force offers tips on lobbing, visiting state officials and letter writing campaigns. Its Web site is www.thetaskforce.org. The Human Rights Campaign, contacted through www.hrc.org, is another organization that offers information on gay marriage and other human rights issues.

Don’t miss the point; consider that advocates for same-sex marriages are really only asking to be given their civil right.