View Poll Results: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?

Voters
105. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, civil unions are an acceptable compromise.

    17 16.19%
  • No, they are not, because:

    55 52.38%
  • The government should not be involved with marriage, at all.

    25 23.81%
  • Other (Please Explain)

    8 7.62%
Page 72 of 83 FirstFirst ... 2262707172737482 ... LastLast
Results 711 to 720 of 830

Thread: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

  1. #711
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:11 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,363
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    No, you are mistaking "what I think" for "what everyone must find logical".
    You have yet to present a logical argument in this thread. That is simply fact. Appeals to emotion and tradition are not logical.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  2. #712
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:11 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,363
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    I have seen folks argue that expanding the functional qualification to fall within the definition of marriage to "two people who love each other" would not, in fact, degrade that institutions' social support.

    I have, thus far, found the arguments tempting (it would be nice if it was true), but not convincing (I do not think that it is).
    There is no evidence that allowing SSM would have any negative impact, and evidence that it would have a positive impact(see child raising). You can believe what you want, but just wishing something to be true won't make it so.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #713
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:11 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,363
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    It alters the basis of the unit, which in turn shifts it from focusing on that function. It is as if we were to take the Sacramento Police Force and tell them that instead of solving and preventing crimes in Sacramento, they were now tasked with "world peace". Naturally, Sacramento would suffer. Broadening the focus away from the mission reduces it's effectiveness.



    Then you have a problem, because expanding the definition to include simply two people who love each other will further decay the connection between marriage and stable family formation.
    Apparently this is complicated for you, so I will say it slowly:

    Gay people have families too.

    Now your whole argument has just fallen apart.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #714
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Actually, common sense would be what is important. Making two sets of laws so that two groups of people can do the exact same thing, but calling one one thing and the other something else, just so as not to piss off a few silly, emotional people is kinda stupid. That is why civil unions as the OP expresses them is a bad idea.
    common sense would be to have the govt recognize a legal civil union for everybody and then let the various churches decide which unions they are willing to grant the title of "marriage" upon

    and FWIW, those "few silly emotional people" in all statistical probability outnumber the gays wanting to get married, considering that gays are a very small % of the population. you could just as well argue "why change the current laws against gay marriage just to appease a very few people"

    personally, I could care ****all about gay marriage. if they are willing to take the responsibilities and bennies of marriage...more power to them. let em get married, let em serve in the military, let em adopt kids
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  5. #715
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:11 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,363
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    common sense would be to have the govt recognize a legal civil union for everybody and then let the various churches decide which unions they are willing to grant the title of "marriage" upon

    and FWIW, those "few silly emotional people" in all statistical probability outnumber the gays wanting to get married, considering that gays are a very small % of the population. you could just as well argue "why change the current laws against gay marriage just to appease a very few people"

    personally, I could care ****all about gay marriage. if they are willing to take the responsibilities and bennies of marriage...more power to them. let em get married, let em serve in the military, let em adopt kids
    Why would you entirely overhaul a mostly working system when you can make a small fix?

    An appeal to popularity is not a good argument.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  6. #716
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    I don't have a dog in this fight, but if I did, I would probably see civil unions as unacceptable.

  7. #717
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    no longer posting
    Last Seen
    01-10-13 @ 02:56 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    453

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Why would you entirely overhaul a mostly working system when you can make a small fix?

    .
    Yep, exactly why the libertarian position on this one is so unrealistic.

  8. #718
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,066

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    I agree with this.

    Okay, let me give one example. Let's say atheists suddenly wanted marriage to be a completely government run thing. They wanted God completely OUT of marriage because it offends them for some reason (not that this would ever happen). I would like to see marriage be protected from something like that. Therefore, if we give civil unions as an option that have all the same benefits as a marriage, then they can have their "sterilized" version of a wedding and not have to impose it upon everyone else.
    That would be against the 1st Amendment in more ways than one, just as if it was the opposite, religious wanted everyone else to completely give up marriage and use another name for their unions and couples could never call themselves married unless they had a religious ceremony. They would violate freedom or religion and freedom of speech laws by making such demands.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  9. #719
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,066

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    That's not the point I was making at all. It's the idea that some customs and things about marriage DO mean something to some people, and those people are not any less important than any other group of people, so they should also have some protections. The option of civil union for those who are unhappy with any aspect of marriage as it exists could use that option.
    Marriage means a lot of different things to a lot of different people and none of them is more or less correct in how they view marriage (unless it is used as a form of oppression or something of the sort). My marriage is about love and loyalty and respect and trying to equal out what each person does plus a whole lot of other things. My grandparents on the other hand slept in different rooms and really didn't talk to each other. By the time I came along, the first of their grandchildren, they had very little love for each other in them. Their marriage was nothing like my parents, I knew this from a very young age. But their marriage worked well for them. My other set of grandparents actually did talk once about getting remarried (they had been divorced for over 20 years) just to get my grandmother better benefits. It is all about what works best for each person in their marriage. But it is all about marriage if that is what they need.

    Should those who have different customs or traditions for marriage have to settle for a civil union instead of marriage just because some may find their views on what customs and traditions go with marriage may be wrong? As was put out before, marriage customs and traditions are a personal thing, not relevant to legal marriage.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  10. #720
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,066

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    common sense would be to have the govt recognize a legal civil union for everybody and then let the various churches decide which unions they are willing to grant the title of "marriage" upon

    and FWIW, those "few silly emotional people" in all statistical probability outnumber the gays wanting to get married, considering that gays are a very small % of the population. you could just as well argue "why change the current laws against gay marriage just to appease a very few people"

    personally, I could care ****all about gay marriage. if they are willing to take the responsibilities and bennies of marriage...more power to them. let em get married, let em serve in the military, let em adopt kids
    No.

    First of all, religions do not own marriage. They do not get to hold sole ownership of marriage.

    Second, it is fiscally stupid to change the name of the marriage contract just because some don't want to share the term with other couples who would consider themselves married even without the legal term but it would all cost the entire country more money to put into place.

    And those silly people who are for keeping marriage a religious thing or between opposite sex couples may be outnumbered by same sex couples and even gays in general, but they are the ones outnumbered by those who support allowing same sex couples to marry. Because there are a lot of heterosexuals like myself who fully believe same sex couples deserve legal access to marriage and that marriage is owned by society, not religion.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

Page 72 of 83 FirstFirst ... 2262707172737482 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •