Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why not just get government out of the marriage business?
Children.
When my kids were little the government didn't have to support them or me because I was married to their father and he paid everything. It has been repeatedly shown that fathers that are married to their child's mother are more willing to financially and emotionally support their children.
When my kids were little the government didn't have to support them or me because I was married to their father and he paid everything. It has been repeatedly shown that fathers that are married to their child's mother are more willing to financially and emotionally support their children.
He's asking why the government doesn't stop sanctioning "marriage." And my argument is that they should just call it civil unions between any two people.
Actually, it is a separate but equal proposal and it simply isn't right.
Marriage has nothing to do with the religious activity. It is the words chosen to define a union that in effect gives 2 people the right to sue each other. It is important not to have a civil union vs marriage approach because marriage is the governments definition.
Religions have weddings... not marriages.
For the traditional straight person they would not realize the difference between such "simple" terms but in the legal world the difference is vast.
Marriage needs to be between 2 consenting people, with all the rights and obligations bestowed, regardless of sex.
Marriage needs to be between 2 consenting people, with all the rights and obligations bestowed, regardless of sex.
And people need to understand that all the hooey about "building blocks of society" and "procreation" and "we've done it this way for (insert arbitrary number) of years" are legally irrelevant and sure as hell don't jibe with the Constitution.
Why should we try "separate but equal" again just to appease a group of religious wackos and bigots?
It should be marriage for everyone or civil union for everyone. The homophobes will go to any length, including this absurd notion that government can just get out of the marriage business and let churches take over instead, to maintain their ability to treat homosexuals as a second class of citizen worthy of scorn and institutionalized shame. I have yet to see a single proponent of this supposed solution offer to let male/female partners married in a church only call themselves civil unioned while the gays and other people that have formalized their relationships in a secular setting use the term married. This is just another way of trying to make sure that male/female relationships are given superior status under the law.
The idea that someone's church magically confers some type of special status on a male/female relationship already recognized as equal to a same sex relationship in civil law is moronic. The real solution is to follow the US Constitution and keep your religious beliefs out of our civil laws. The problem is not that the government is involved in marriage it is that some people believe that their fundamentalist bronze age sky daddy fairy tales have a role in the creation of secular law.
I think many gays, lesbians and the like want the word *marriage* to be used to legally acknowledge their love for their partners, not just *partnership*, *civil union*, or any other beat-around-the-bush terminology.
They want the Christians to accept their sexual orientation. THAT is what this is about.
I've suggested the exact same thing as the OP, several times. I've even started a thread about it, IIRC. The problems with the idea are that the social conservatives will see it as a defeat, even though it really isn't, so they're going to fight it, and the pro-gay crowd won't see it as a victory, because they don't just want the legal recognition, regardless of what they say. They want to "win the game" between themselves and the anti-gay Christians.
It's really a very simple solution without any technical problems whatsoever, but it will never come to pass any time soon for the reasons I mentioned above.
Then that is absolutely a change of definition. I cant see how you have a marriage without a husband AND a wife. A man and a woman.
I thought gays just wanted the same benefits and the like. And I seriously believe if we go down this road further, the forcing of churches to marry gays will come eventually.
What difference does it make if my same sex spouse and I call each other married? If it is only semantics, then there is no big deal. It does not affect your marriage wether it is religious or a federal civil union. Why should I or anyone choose to call their unions domestically partnered or civil unionized if marriage already fits that bill perfectly. The Uniterian church already wants to marry gay people, but other churchs prevent that. I am married to my same sex spouse of 34 years, it is husband and husband, we call us married and so does my family and his. The church or any church for that matter does not own the word marriage, nor do they have a say in civil marriage contracts offered by the federal government.
They want the Christians to accept their sexual orientation. THAT is what this is about.
I've suggested the exact same thing as the OP, several times. I've even started a thread about it, IIRC. The problems with the idea are that the social conservatives will see it as a defeat, even though it really isn't, so they're going to fight it, and the pro-gay crowd won't see it as a victory, because they don't just want the legal recognition, regardless of what they say. They want to "win the game" between themselves and the anti-gay Christians.
It's really a very simple solution without any technical problems whatsoever, but it will never come to pass any time soon for the reasons I mentioned above.
Civil unions and domestic partnerships are also not allowed in those states that ban same sex marriage. The goal and agenda of the church is to prevent us gays and lesbians from having any union legally recognized that may in any way resemble their oh so sacred weddings. Yet they do nothing about divorce.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
