I'm curious about this civil union/marriage issue

[gollygee]

So here's a poll! And to clarify - I'm talking about THE GOVERNMENT'S ROLE in the thing. This is not about churches. If you think that people should get civil unions, and then churches would do any marriage if they wanted, then you want #3 or #4.

[Skittles]

1. Civil Unions STINK

it's a way of saying, yeah you can get on the bus but SIT IN THE BACK :thumbsdown:

[AlCzervik]

2. What Skittles said.

:thumbsup:

and for those of you that think everyone should just have a civil union as opposed to marriage---feel free to go that route yourself ok?

[Warren Stupidity]

11. I got whatever license my state offered.

There was no such thing as a 'civil union' then.

There is a path to diffuse this issue by separating the religious institution of marriage from the contractual issue. There is a way out of the conflict that removes the wedge that the rightwing hate mongerers are using to divide us. People are actually confused: many think that allowing 'gay marriage' means that their hate mongering church will be forced to conduct man-penguin marriages. Many people are quite stupid and fearful and easily lead astray.

[AlCzervik]

17. My sister and her husband were married at city hall, they got a Marriage certificate and not

a "Civil union" certificate, no religious folk were there.

[IndianaJones]

3. but its the same water. nt.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. what if that was all government offered anyone?

I have no idea why government is involved in what appears to be a religious rite called 'marriage'. Instead government should provide standardized civil union licenses to consenting adults.

However, what I am in favor of is equal rights for all people.

[Solly Mack]

31. Exactly

and keep your mouth shut while you're back there

[TechBear_Seattle]

4. Marriage comes with centuries of judicial precedent. Civil unions do not. n/t

[bemildred]

6. People are better off, and so is society, if they live in families.

The particular makeup of the families is not as important. Nobody wants to make church people do anything they don't want to. If you want a Catholic wedding, or a Jewish one, or whatever, you have to toe the line. But everybody else gets to make up their own rules too, and that includes EVERYBODY.

[Liberalynn]

7. I am sraight but I feel anything less than full marriage rights

for gays is a cop out and unconstitutional. Again if marriage is only a religious institution, then everyone needs to give any monies received from their marital IRS deductions back.

No one says any church should be forced to marry gay people, if their own private institutions don't allow it.

Its simply that the U.S. government cannot deny the rights of any U.S. citizen to be married by a Justice of the Peace, who is a civil servant, not a religious one, or any clergy who is willing to marry them. They also cannot write into law that the government refuse to recognize that marriage as "legitimate" and thefore deny equal rights and piveleges under the Constitution.

Otherwise if Gays are denied the right to marry under the law, then everyone needs to give up every legal right to marriage, and any government privleges extended to them because of that right. The government should then give up any claim that it has the right to regulate or recognize any marriage or divorce in any way shape or form, in that case too. Thats what equal protection means people. Like it or lump it.

Pure and simple. This shouldn't even be up for debate or vote. Prop 8 or any bill like is Unconstitutional prima facia, meaning on its face. The Federal Courts need to step in and throw any bills like this out, without any further debate, or they are shirking their Constitutional duties.

[Barack_America]

8. Option #1, but even further. I think that civil marriages should be required of all.

If people want an additional religious ceremony, that's their own business.

I don't think that clergy should be allowed to validate marriage licenses issued by the state.

Essentially, I want churches out of legal "marriages" altogether.

[gollygee]

9. Then what you want is option #3

assuming you are straight.

[Gwendolyn]

12. Not necessarily since civil marriage is not the same as civil union.

It's just another way to marginalize our nation from the rest of the world.

[gollygee]

13. Oh, I think I misread her (or him?)

S/he doesn't want churches to be able to perform marriages at all? That's not in the poll but is a different option.

[Gwendolyn]

16. What's being proposed in several threads is civil union. That isn't the same ball 'o wax.

Maybe I misread. :crazy:

But some people want to abolish marriage altogether, civil and otherwise, in favor of civil union, so we'd be the only country on earth with some different form of "love partnering." It's strange.

[Barack_America]

15. This is how it's done in France, Spain, Germany, etc.

Before you have a religious ceremony, you must have a civil ceremony. You are married by the state, not the church.

[gollygee]

20. Oh, I see

Another thread said that those countries offered civil unions, and then churches performed marriage. I have not been to those countries so I did not know.

[Barack_America]

21. They may call it "civil union", but it's the state ceremony that gives you the legal rights.

The religious ceremony is between you and your church. It counts for nothing, legally.

What I've proposed would cause a major uproar in this county, but I can't help but think that if we got churches out of the legal "marriage" business for everybody, the church-folk would be less paranoid about gay "marriage".

[plaintiff]

10. I don't give a shit what name "they" give it as long as EVERYONE has equal access to it.

It ain't rocket science...

[closeupready]

18. That's what I say.

n/t

[frogmarch]

14. Marriage for all, and I'm straight. nt

[Bryn]

19. My gay uncle was happily married to my aunt for 47 years

He passed away last May at age of 72. He was a hairdresser in California for years then moved to Arkansas, owned a barber shop and beauty shop. He married Jane, a registered nurse in Tallahassee, Florida in early 1960s. She understood him and accepted for who he was and let him have boyfriends, etc. As he got older, he just didn't have anymore gay relationships so he and Jane settled down here in Arkansas, grew veggie garden, enjoyed each other's company. They loved each other, but not romantically. Together they adopted a baby girl when they lived in California. It seemed to work out very well for him. I admire Aunt Jane for accepting him for who he was and supported him. He was never a "bi" but was a completely gay man. He was my mother's brother as well as her best friend. She's not same without him now. I miss him a lot.

Just thought I'd tell you this interesting unusual story, kinda like Will & Grace. I guess perhaps it worked out that way in old days.

I give my support for gays to be allowed to get married if they want to. My uncle would have been happy to see this happen.

[gollygee]

22. kick hopefully for more votes

thank goodness nobody has picked the later options.

[BlueJazz]

23. Fuck Civil Unions....They're just a slap in the face instead of an ass-kicking....

[gollygee]

24. I'm going to kick this one more time before I go to bed

[TexasObserver]

25. Equal rights and the right to the pursuit of happiness = right to marry.

This is about whether we will allow the bigotry of the majority deprive a minority group of basic human rights.

[qwlauren35]

26. Here is my radical compromise.

Every "couple" starts with a civil union.
Those who have or adopt children get married.
If you bring children into the relationship, and the other will adopt the children, then you get married.
If you bring children into the relationship, but joint custody is still shared by another person, then you have a civil union.

Radical. Should piss off everyone.

[DireStrike]

27. As a straight agnostic, I say civil unions for all.

If you wanna get married, go do it in your own holy building. I don't care.

I suppose I'm assuming that the legal rights generally associated with "marriage" would be subsumed into this new stronger civil union. Common law references to marriage would be understood to refer to the legal situation of civil union.

[cardFan123]

28. I voted other

i would vote for marriage being what a church calls it, and if the church that you belong to wants to marry you, then go for it. And that everything as far as the government goes is called a civil union.

I'm straight. The few GL people that I know seem to only care about having the actual rights, and don't really care what it is called, as long as they get the rights.

[TahitiNut]

29. I think everyone should have the chance to enjoy the learning experience of ...

... divorce. :evilgrin:

[Independent_Voice]

30. Who's the sleazeball who voted for Option #7 ???

A lurking freeper troll (who's registered on DU), I'll bet.