View Poll Results: Should civil unions replace marriage for legal purposes?

Voters
66. You may not vote on this poll
  • The term civil union should replace the term marriage for legal purposes

    15 22.73%
  • Both terms, civil union (for gay couples)and marriage (for straight), should be used

    25 37.88%
  • The term marriage should be use equally for gay and straight couples

    21 31.82%
  • Gay couples should not be able to have the rights of marriage at all.

    5 7.58%
Page 21 of 35 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 345

Thread: Civil Unions

  1. #201
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    This is completely accurate. Marriage, until recently, was always a religious institution.
    Actually, THAT statement is completely inaccurate.

    Until relatively recently, the church was always the government, and hence marriage was always a state function.

    When the people finally started waking up to the evils of theocracy, and the churches began to break up....it was the state that retained control of the laws regulating marriages, not the churches....after all, just for one example, one wouldn't expect the Catholics and the Prods in Ireland to cooperate in their marriage rules...that's the state's job.

    Still is.

  2. #202
    Global Moderator
    Sinister
    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    133,771

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Actually, THAT statement is completely inaccurate.

    Until relatively recently, the church was always the government, and hence marriage was always a state function.

    When the people finally started waking up to the evils of theocracy, and the churches began to break up....it was the state that retained control of the laws regulating marriages, not the churches....after all, just for one example, one wouldn't expect the Catholics and the Prods in Ireland to cooperate in their marriage rules...that's the state's job.

    Still is.
    Actually, with what you posted, we are both correct. Marriage functioned as both a religious ceremony and a governmental function...while the church was governmental. However, that does not alter the fact that marriage was church based...regardless of what the context was.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  3. #203
    Advisor DGomez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Last Seen
    09-20-11 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    380

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Until relatively recently, the church was always the government, and hence marriage was always a state function.
    Not so. In the strictest sense, the definition of a monarchy is the the king/queen answers only to God. Thus, if you are referring to Western nations as I assume you were, the Catholic Church was looked upon as the higher authority. Priests owned land, it's true, but the Church was not technically the reigning government.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    When the people finally started waking up to the evils of theocracy, and the churches began to break up....it was the state that retained control of the laws regulating marriages, not the churches....after all, just for one example, one wouldn't expect the Catholics and the Prods in Ireland to cooperate in their marriage rules...that's the state's job.
    Also not so. Western nations never had a theocracy. A good example of a theocracy would be the Egyptians where they believed their ruler actually was a god.

    When Martin Luther and King Henry VII brought about their revisions to the church, marriage was still considered a religious matter. You still had to get married through a religion; it was just THEIR religion.

  4. #204
    Advisor DGomez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Last Seen
    09-20-11 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    380

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Marriage functioned as both a religious ceremony and a governmental function...while the church was governmental.
    The Catholic Church was never governmental. It held control over the Western nations becuase it held power over their immortal souls. Essentially, if you weren't in good favor with the pope, you could be damned. So it acted like a mediator for their squabbles.

  5. #205
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,616

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by DGomez View Post
    This, I am afraid, is an extremely inaccurate statement. Up until quite recently, Religion DID own marriage.
    No, up until quite recently, religion CLAIMED ownership of marriage, whether or not that's actually true or not. However, what may have been true, or perceived to be true in the past, has no bearing on what is true today. In the modern world, religion simply provides a ceremony to celebrate marriage, it has no other function in the process.

    You can walk down all the aisles in all of the churches you want, you're not married until you get that piece of paper from the state.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! The Bitchspot Blog YouTube me! The Bitchspot Channel

  6. #206
    User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    OKC
    Last Seen
    04-03-09 @ 09:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    19

    Re: Civil Unions

    Jesse Ventura stated this well:
    We can solve the problem simply. Government only acknowledges civil unions then you don‘t have to put your sex down. Let the churches acknowledge marriage. They are the private sectors. If they don‘t want to acknowledge it, they have every right to do so. How on earth can we even entertain the fact that government should have the ability to tell you as an individual who you can fall in love with? Ridiculous.

  7. #207
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-22-16 @ 07:06 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,215

    Re: Civil Unions

    Originally Posted by DGomez View Post
    This, I am afraid, is an extremely inaccurate statement. Up until quite recently, Religion DID own marriage.
    Which religion?

  8. #208
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    48,241

    Re: Civil Unions

    The whole issue is complicated by government (well government rarely makes anything more efficient). Marriage was sole property of religion before just after the civil war. The founding fathers didn't have to ask permission to be married; they just got married. But all that changed with the advent of the marriage license; it is at that point in which government usurped marriage from religion and made it an institution of their own. The ideal solution is to, of course, get rid of the marriage license; return to the natural state. Let religion have marriage, the State shouldn't be involved. And there should be no civil union either. The "benefits" of marriage, the most cited ones being contractual obligations and definitions can be handled through separate contract. And there is no reason that shouldn't be allowed, name whom you need to name in order to keep affairs in order and things of that nature. There is no special contract needed, you don't need to be married.

    Other benefits of marriage which include monetary advantage, child credit, etc. should all be abolished.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #209
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    No, up until quite recently, religion CLAIMED ownership of marriage, whether or not that's actually true or not. However, what may have been true, or perceived to be true in the past, has no bearing on what is true today. In the modern world, religion simply provides a ceremony to celebrate marriage, it has no other function in the process.

    You can walk down all the aisles in all of the churches you want, you're not married until you get that piece of paper from the state.
    The legal institution of marriage was meant to support the religious institution of marriage.

    If the government wants out of the marriage business, so be it, but that necessarily means that civil unions do not exist either.

  10. #210
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:14 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,639

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by emdash View Post
    sweeeeeeeeeping generalization. not one argument to deny anyone from marrying anyone they want.

    It is only a sweeping generalization if it is untrue. Care to test it?
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Supreme Court can't interpret The Constitution. They don't have that power.

Page 21 of 35 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... 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
  •