Civil Unions -- Why not?

[Yurt]

Civil Unions -- why not?



I have always maintained an open mind on this board and the last. And beyond that, but this is where most know me. There have been a couple of posters in the past couple of weeks who have changed my mind on certain ideas. So, I thought, this would be a good idea to open a topic I had with some on a site in a distant internet, far, far away.


My points:

1. In many states they recognize "common" law marriage. Thus even if you are not married, you still get treated as if married.

2. In many states, even if the spouse was a lying sack of turd when he or she told you that you are married, if you are held out as being "spouses" then you can recover under the law.

3. In every state, if you are married, you have the state tell you the disposition and the exposition of your marital state and property. No religious leader can help you now. None. Only the STATE.

4. In order to get a "legal" status that grants you "rights" that only the state grants you, ONLY, the state can grant you the title to get those rights. No religious person, none.


So, what exactly is "holy" about marriage?

Is it Bimbo Spears who can get "married" in vegas? What is it? Because Bimbo did in fact get married. And it was in fact the STATE who annulled it.

I am interested.

[diuretic]

If I may.

My understanding (ie dim, distant memory) is that marriage is, in Christian churches, a sacrament. Is that correct? I'm asking because I know it's a sacrament in the Catholic Church. But - I can only speak for my country (our matrimonial laws are federal and not state as they are in the US) marriage is also a civil matter. Legally there's no difference between being married in a church or being married in a registry office. The only contextual difference is that being married in a church is also a religious occasion.

Our laws here do not allow same-sex couples to marry pursuant to federal law. Some states (note that, it's an important difference) are looking to legislate for civil unions under state law which will provide the same legal rights as marriage under federal law, but at the moment there is no prospect of same-sex marriages under federal law. I stress, marriage is a legal issue here but it can carry a religious context as I stated above.

Now I know this is going to descend into a "gay attack on marriage" thread but before it does I need to make a couple of points.

1. Marriage is a legal arrangement. Strip it of orchid blossoms and rice and it's clear it's a legal arrangement. I can't think of a valid reason for individuals to be denied the right to enter that legal arrangement simply because they are of the same sex. It's a denial of rights available to everyone else. It's pure discrimination without a shred of justification.

2. The churches (and other religions) should be left along by the legislature. If they wish or don't wish to marry same-sex couples then I don't think they should be forced to by the legislature.

3. I know that some gay activists are opposed to civil unions and want the marriage ritual. I know that some people believe that is an attack on "traditional/conventional" marriage. I have no doubt that some gay activists are pushing "marriage" as opposed to civil unions simply to make a point. I'm also sure that some gay activists are not doing it out of spite but fervently believe that if they gain the ability to marry then that means one more plank of discrimination is removed and they continue to march towards equality with heterosexuals. The removal of discrimination against gays and lesbians and the provision of equal rights is, in my opinion, a stronger claim than the claim that giving gays and lesbians the right to marry is offensive to the feelings of event the majority of people. It takes nothing away from the concept of marriage. Since it does no harm other than hurt some feelings it should be permitted.

Okay, standing by for the usual trashing from the usual suspects :laugh2:

[PostmodernProphet]

in most protestant Christian churches it is not considered a sacrament......the state didn't start getting involved in matrimony until Napolean.....if you have had any contact with geneology, you will know that all records of marriages were maintained by the church until he decreed the state should keep track of that information.......