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 77 of 83 FirstFirst ... 27677576777879 ... LastLast
Results 761 to 770 of 830

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

  1. #761
    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]

    just for a reference; a compromise is when both sides give up something. neither side gets 100% of what they want.

    anti-gay crowd wants no gay unions at all
    gays want 'marriage"

    seems to me that in this instance the 'anti-gay' crowd is willing to compromise their position to a much greater extent
    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.

  2. #762
    Guru
    Verthaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    09-08-16 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,044

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

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    did I ever say it was? I really don't give a rat's ass either way as long as I still get all the legal benefits from the gubbermint. you can call the union between my wife and I a fraking turnip for all i care.

    it's as I said earlier. it is more important to gays (and supporters) to have the social acceptance of calling their unions a 'marriage' than it is to have the identical legal benefits under a different name.

    not saying it's right or wrong, but that is how it appears.
    No need to to get snippy.
    All I asked was if you owned the word "marriage",which apparently by your reaction that you don't.
    Nor did I even mention legal benefits.
    Nor did I imply that you would lose yours.

    How things appear to you is how you see it.
    Some people choose to see things a certain way.
    But it doesn't necessarily mean that is the way they are.

    Since you,nor anyone else owns the word "marriage" I still don't see the reason to compromise.

  3. #763
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    396

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

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    did I ever say it was? I really don't give a rat's ass either way as long as I still get all the legal benefits from the gubbermint. you can call the union between my wife and I a fraking turnip for all i care.

    it's as I said earlier. it is more important to gays (and supporters) to have the social acceptance of calling their unions a 'marriage' than it is to have the identical legal benefits under a different name.

    not saying it's right or wrong, but that is how it appears.
    You believe that the term 'marriage' is more important to supporters than benefits

    I'm going to make an assumption on your reasoning - please clarify if I'm wrong:

    You believe this because when homosexuals and supporters of equal marriage privileges are offered the term 'civil unions', but equal benefits, we reject the offer and go for the term 'marriage'.

    I believe your leap in reasoning is faulty.

    If I were given an absolute choice for gays to be able to enter into civil unions w/ equal benefits or nothing at all, I would of course choose to have differing terms, but equal benefits.

    However, this is a societal-based issue - there is no absolute and final ultimatum. what I believe is morally right is for the term to be equal and the benefits to be equal. If I reject the offer to get my top priority because my lower priority wasn't met as well, this does not indicate that my lower priority is actually my top priority. It only indicates that my lower priority is also of great value to me. And if there is a probable chance that I can get both priorities achieved IMO, I will reject the offer and go for bust. Because it's what I believe the right thing to do is.

    Calling it two different things can imply to some that they ARE two different things in their fundamental meaning. Homosexuals and supporters believe that the fundamental meaning behind a marriage does not include gender.

  4. #764
    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 Verthaine View Post
    No need to to get snippy.
    All I asked was if you owned the word "marriage",which apparently by your reaction that you don't.
    Nor did I even mention legal benefits.
    Nor did I imply that you would lose yours.

    How things appear to you is how you see it.
    Some people choose to see things a certain way.
    But it doesn't necessarily mean that is the way they are.

    Since you,nor anyone else owns the word "marriage" I still don't see the reason to compromise.
    you were the one getting snippy.

    as for the rest, I guess a better question for the OP would have been "are gays willing to accept ANY compromise". apparently the answer is a resounding NO.

    not saying that gays should have to compromise. but sometimes in real life, we all have to do things we shouldn't in order to get a 90% solution to what we want.
    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. #765
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:36 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,294
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    question: In principle, would gay couples be willing to accept civil unions that were identical to marriage in every respect but name? forget the practical implications of implementation, would such a compromise be acceptable in principle?
    Your question basically is if you ignore reality would it be acceptable. You cannot ignore reality and come up with realistic answers.
    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. #766
    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 fredmertzz View Post
    If I were given an absolute choice for gays to be able to enter into civil unions w/ equal benefits or nothing at all, I would of course choose to have differing terms, but equal benefits.
    hence the term "compromise"

    However, this is a societal-based issue - there is no absolute and final ultimatum. what I believe is morally right is for the term to be equal and the benefits to be equal. If I reject the offer to get my top priority because my lower priority wasn't met as well, this does not indicate that my lower priority is actually my top priority. It only indicates that my lower priority is also of great value to me. And if there is a probable chance that I can get both priorities achieved IMO, I will reject the offer and go for bust. Because it's what I believe the right thing to do is.
    and this confirms my assumption that the societal acceptance is the most important factor, since that seems to be the "deal breaker"

    Calling it two different things can imply to some that they ARE two different things in their fundamental meaning. Homosexuals and supporters believe that the fundamental meaning behind a marriage does not include gender.
    and as long as the law enforces that there are NOT any fundamental differences....why should it matter what "some" may imply?
    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.

  7. #767
    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
    Your question basically is if you ignore reality would it be acceptable. You cannot ignore reality and come up with realistic answers.
    suppose all current law said marriage was between one man and one woman. the proposed compromise would require a second set of laws that said civil union was between two consenting adults. what gays want would require rewriting current law to say marriage is between two consenting adults.

    in either case new laws must be written or old laws rewritten/ammended. the only difference is that under the "compromise" there would basically be two sets of almost identical laws on the books. other than being a bit cumbersome, where is the big difference?
    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.

  8. #768
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    396

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

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    hence the term "compromise"



    and this confirms my assumption that the societal acceptance is the most important factor, since that seems to be the "deal breaker"



    and as long as the law enforces that there are NOT any fundamental differences....why should it matter what "some" may imply?
    Your assumption is not correct that acceptance is more important - though I believe it probably is for many. For me, however, it's just that it IS important undeniably. It's not a deal breaker at all - that's where your making a false assumption - so long as there is a chance we can get both goals - the term and the benefit. Ergo, drawing that conclusion is faulty, unless you are posing a question as an ultimatum.

    And it matters what some may infer because acceptance is important, undeniably. But just because it is important does not mean that it's the priority. But if we can get both, we'll certainly try.

  9. #769
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

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

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    just for a reference; a compromise is when both sides give up something. neither side gets 100% of what they want.

    anti-gay crowd wants no gay unions at all
    gays want 'marriage"

    seems to me that in this instance the 'anti-gay' crowd is willing to compromise their position to a much greater extent
    With 19 states banning constitutionally all forms of recognition for same sex couples and the federal government showing no intent whatsoever to allow recognition of anything other than marriage, I'd say the majority of those who are against same sex marriage are not truly willing to give civil unions anyway. That is actually only a small amount of people. And many of those people didn't actually compromise, they started from that position.

    With all the real, measurable downsides with having civil unions for same sex couples and marriage for opposite sex couples, including the financial costs to taxpayers across the country and the perceived discrimination, it is not worth it to have the two separate things in place for the same legal benefits/rights/protections/etc.
    "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. #770
    Guru
    Verthaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    09-08-16 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,044

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

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    you were the one getting snippy.
    Actually,I didn't,but if if you choose to believe otherwise,then I have no control over that.

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    as for the rest, I guess a better question for the OP would have been "are gays willing to accept ANY compromise". apparently the answer is a resounding NO.

    not saying that gays should have to compromise. but sometimes in real life, we all have to do things we shouldn't in order to get a 90% solution to what we want.
    So in other words,there is no need for gays to compromise since no one owns the word "marriage" to compromise with.

Page 77 of 83 FirstFirst ... 27677576777879 ... 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
  •