View Single Post
Old 08-13-2004, 03:09 AM   #14
Disch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,387
Default Re: Question for Christians who Oppose Gay Marriage

> What is so wrong with having two different terms for it?

There's a lot of fine print that specifically applies to the word "marraige" or "spouse" or "husband" or "wife" etc. Not just federal benefits, but insurace coverage, employment benefits, etc. Without the specific word 'marraige'... none of that would have to apply. So a in a heterosexual marraige, one person will be covered under the benefits of their spouse's insurance and whatnot, but in a homosexual 'civil union', there'd be no joint coverage at all.

There's no way in hell all that text is going to get changed to include both marriages and civil unions. You've got better odds of getting the states to convert to the metric system.

Without all that... the term 'civil union' means nothing more than boyfriend/girlfriend.

I suppose there could always be a law passed that says all rights/benefits that applies to legal marraiges must also apply to legal civil unions. That would theoretically solve everything... but I get the feeling there'd still be guff from both sides.

Personally I don't see what the big deal is with the word marriage. Allowing homosexuals to get married isn't any more of a definition twist than allowing married couples to be divorced (it IS supposed to be a life long commitment, after all). And it's the LEGAL definiton of marriage they're looking to change/clarify. Religions can still only recognize heterosexual marriages if they want... that's their call... but that shouldn't have any impact on what the government decides to do.

<P ID="signature"></P>
Disch is offline   Reply With Quote