WTF is wrong with a civil union?

[The T]

I think the issue is probably that giving a different label to what is supposed to be the exact same thing smacks of separate but equal. If the idea is that homosexuals should have the same legal, secular rights and privileges to marriage as heterosexuals, but people are unwilling to use the same label, then clearly they are NOT thought of as being the same.

Civil unions for gays is certainly much closer to equality, but the need to give it a different name than straights use sounds too much like an unwillingness to really allow gays to have the same privileges. Having the legal unions all be labelled civil unions rather than marriage would be a better solution IMO. I don't think heterosexuals would be willing to give up the marriage label, though. Of course, removing government from marriage entirely would also work, but that's not happening any time soon.

Nonsense, their relationship IS different. Thus the need to define it differently. The end result is the same while understanding marriage as a traditional term.

^Yep. And minimum Government involvement...until the 'divorce' proceedings...

 

[California Girl]

While true I wish civil unions would be embraced so we could put this issue behind us. It's damaging to both parties and fosters gridlock.

You want gay people to do what you want them to do so you can move on with life?

No I want gays to achieve their goals without trashing the values of others so people like you will stfu about it.

I agree.

 

[Cowman]

Marriage has ALWAYS been defined as between a man and a woman. It is centuries of tradition. A civil union can be created to give all the same perks as traditional marriage so what's the big fucking deal? Is this just a ploy to diminish the traditional values of most Americans or just a political weapon to divide the people? Cause it sure seems so since there is an alternative that achieves the same goal, civil union legislation.

That, and the homos want us to like them.

You homophobic pussy.

 

[Cowman]

While true I wish civil unions would be embraced so we could put this issue behind us. It's damaging to both parties and fosters gridlock.

You want gay people to do what you want them to do so you can move on with life?

No I want gays to achieve their goals without trashing the values of others so people like you will stfu about it.

Their goal is to get "married" and have the same rights.

Besides, people on your side don't even want them to be able to get a civil union. They would rather they be stoned or shunned from society... all while secretly craving the penis themselves. Sad, really.

 

[Truthmatters]

I say we should have civil unions for everyone.

If you want a religious marriage then get one.

Thaat way religious types can keep the word marriage

THe smart solution

 

[BlindBoo]

The government has no business interfering in the religious sacrement of marriage. Futhermore if some church somewhere deems it okay to marry same sex couples have at it.

Supporters of the gay marriage bans are nanny statist want to micro-manage everyone's life.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

You want gay people to do what you want them to do so you can move on with life?

No I want gays to achieve their goals without trashing the values of others so people like you will stfu about it.

Their goal is to get "married" and have the same rights.

Besides, people on your side don't even want them to be able to get a civil union. They would rather they be stoned or shunned from society... all while secretly craving the penis themselves. Sad, really.

In my opinion marriage is over rated just as your second paragraph is stupid.

 

[The T]

I say we should have civil unions for everyone.

If you want a religious marriage then get one.

Thaat way religious types can keep the word marriage

Holy Shit! We agree on something. That's not good.

Whod'a thunk it?

 

[Truthmatters]

I say let the religious have their word.

Give all Americans the rights of a civil union.

go to your favorite church and get married for your religion.

Only the civil union will be legal

 

[Truthmatters]

speration of church and state

 

[konradv]

If there's nothing wrong with a civil union, the government should be giving them to everyone and staying out of the definition of marriage. Then it can be defined and performed, however your particular religion or tradition specifies. Problem solved!

 

[Truthmatters]

wow a near consensus

 

[Dr.Drock]

You want gay people to do what you want them to do so you can move on with life?

No I want gays to achieve their goals without trashing the values of others so people like you will stfu about it.

Their goal is to get "married" and have the same rights.

Besides, people on your side don't even want them to be able to get a civil union. They would rather they be stoned or shunned from society... all while secretly craving the penis themselves. Sad, really.

Anything to add to the discussion besides broad brushing and exaggerated talking points?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Me personally? Like I've said many times before, all the gov't would have to do is have 2 boxes on the marriage liscence, one marked "civil union" and one marked "marriage".

If it's signed by someone who is authorized to perform ceremonies, but is not an ordained minister? They check the box marked "civil union".

If the liscence is signed by an ordained minister, then the box marked "marriage" should be checked. And, fwiw, there are many churches today that are willing to marry gays.

However, regardless of if the box is signed by a minister or by a civil servant, they should have the same tax breaks, visitation rights, property rights and be recognized by the federal government.

 

[ClosedCaption]

While true I wish civil unions would be embraced so we could put this issue behind us. It's damaging to both parties and fosters gridlock.

You want gay people to do what you want them to do so you can move on with life?

No I want gays to achieve their goals without trashing the values of others so people like you will stfu about it.

If you didnt see it as "trashing values" there wouldnt be a problem. Would it?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Me personally? Like I've said many times before, all the gov't would have to do is have 2 boxes on the marriage liscence, one marked "civil union" and one marked "marriage".

If it's signed by someone who is authorized to perform ceremonies, but is not an ordained minister? They check the box marked "civil union".

If the liscence is signed by an ordained minister, then the box marked "marriage" should be checked. And, fwiw, there are many churches today that are willing to marry gays.

However, regardless of if the box is signed by a minister or by a civil servant, they should have the same tax breaks, visitation rights, property rights and be recognized by the federal government.

Agreed for the most part. I would even pos rep you for it but you neged me for no reason the other day so i will refrain.

 

[jillian]

Marriage has ALWAYS been defined as between a man and a woman. It is centuries of tradition. A civil union can be created to give all the same perks as traditional marriage so what's the big fucking deal? Is this just a ploy to diminish the traditional values of most Americans or just a political weapon to divide the people? Cause it sure seems so since there is an alternative that achieves the same goal, civil union legislation.

I mean this is considered an "alternative" lifestyle so why the push for a traditional label that has long been honored by everyone?

Many of you claim some of us are against equal treatment but you're wrong. You can have equal treatment but you don't need to trash traditional values to achieve it.

1. why do we need yet another thread on this, gramps?

2. this has already been discussed ad nauseum.

separate but equal isn't equal. you'll just have to get over it. just like people who made the same type of arguments about anti-miscegenation laws have had to get over it. (although as we see on this board, some of them still aren't over it).

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

You want gay people to do what you want them to do so you can move on with life?

No I want gays to achieve their goals without trashing the values of others so people like you will stfu about it.

If you didnt see it as "trashing values" there wouldnt be a problem. Would it?

Nope I wouldn't. People can do whatever they want in this great country. Including gays. What you can't do IS REDEFINE AND FORCE that redefined definition on someone who has lived their entire life believing something else.

 

[The T]

No I want gays to achieve their goals without trashing the values of others so people like you will stfu about it.

If you didnt see it as "trashing values" there wouldnt be a problem. Would it?

Nope I wouldn't. People can do whatever they want in this great country. Including gays. What you can't do IS REDEFINE AND FORCE that redefined definition on someone who has lived their entire life believing something else.

"Forced acceptance" .

 

[Truthmatters]

then let the church have the word and Civil Unions for everyone.


Only the civil union will be a legal document