GeorgeGist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-08 08:07 PM
Original message |
Is there any reason to believe that civil unions would not be ... |
|
more successful than traditional marriage. If not, then traditional marriage might become history.
|
yardwork
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-08 08:12 PM
Response to Original message |
1. The United States already has both for everybody, as long as they're straight. |
|
Edited on Tue Nov-11-08 08:12 PM by yardwork
When you obtain your marriage license, the government is giving you the right to marry or civil union or whatever it is that you want to call it. The license says "marriage license" on it, but it's a civil contract. Many people choose to sanctify this union with a religious ceremony, which is also called marriage. The religious ceremony is totally optional and has no legal meaning whatsoever. The legal contract is contained in that marriage license issued by the county courthouse.
Straight people can do this anywhere in the United States, and their civil union is legal in any other state. Nobody cares if they got married in a church or not. All that matters is that marriage license and the fact that somebody signed off on your marriage. Doesn't matter if that person is a priest or a minister or clerk of court or a judge or a seaboat captain.
Got it?
|
csziggy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-08 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Our civil union was legalized by a pizza cook/notary public with no ceremony |
|
It has stuck for 31+ years, longer than most of our friends' marriages that went through the entire religious rigmarole with all the bells and whistles. We got the license signed and submitted it to the county - absolute minimum legal requirement.
Frankly, that is all I think should be recognized by the government - and no longer allow religious figures to automatically be allowed to legalize a civil union. Clergy should have to meet the same standard for legalizing a civil union as any other person and not be given that right just because they are "ordained" or claim to be a religious leader. A strictly religious union should not get recognition for the purpose of getting tax exemptions, insurance coverage or any other legal need.
Take this out of the churches' hands and leave the legal definition a secular item instead of letting some churches fuck with peoples' happiness!
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:20 AM
Response to Original message |