Quote:
Originally Posted by AGDee
I think it's going to be some time before the majority of the people are willing to consider the idea of gay marriage in most localities. In 2004, Michigan voters passed the amendment to define marriage as "between one man and one woman" and we're a very blue state too.
I think we need to get rid of the term marriage altogether, except as a religious ceremony. Make the license for EVERYBODY say "Civil Union License" and make the rights the same as they are for marriage currently. This would be your legal version of marriage. The religious version would be up to the churches entirely, just like Baptism or other ceremonies are. The only thing is, I don't like the term civil union itself because I'm not sure what you would say "We're getting unionized" doesn't seem like a logical term to me. "We're getting civilized" doesn't work either. "We're being civil unionized"? "We're being partnered" ??? I just don't know what to really call it so that it makes sense. Take the religion completely out of the legal aspect of the whole thing. Then the government is allowing the same thing for any consenting adult and the churches can do what they want. The more I think about this, the more I think this is the way to go. It seems ridiculous to have to spend the kind of money it would take to do this when there is already a legal institution in place, but the term "marriage" has too many religious connotations to too many people at this point. This would better solidify a separation of church and state.
|
Hear, hear!
Why can't we have a "civil union" between members of opposite sexes? (In fact, that's what my "marriage" is - we were married by a Judge in Colorado, in a "civil service").
No religious organization that I know of will perform "marriage" ceremonies without a civil license.
Look how many companies will allow an individual to provide "same sex domestic partner" benefits, yet my office mate cannot cover her long-time live-in boyfriend, because he's not same-sex and they're not married.
Recognizing marriages/unions for what they are -- contracts -- would go a long way.