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 1 of 35 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 345

Thread: Civil Unions

  1. #1
    Professor
    Layla_Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Seen
    09-16-16 @ 10:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    1,439
    Blog Entries
    1

    Civil Unions

    My question is: Is there room for compromise in the gay marriage debate? Would it be acceptable to label all marriage (man and woman, or two men, or two women) a civil union for legal purposes. If I'm not mistaken now a couple is married once they sign the marriage certificate, the ceremony is secondary from a legal standpoint. So make all marriages a civil union in the eyes of the government with all the legal rights that go with it. Marriage would be a religious issue.
    ~Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.
    ~I have as much authority as the Pope, I just don't have as many people who believe it.
    ~If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?
    George Carlin

  2. #2
    Every day I'm hustlin'..
    Lerxst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nationwide...
    Last Seen
    01-07-15 @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,067

    Re: Civil Unions

    Gay couples should have the same rights as hetero couples. This moral board that's up societies ass is starting to smell a bit gamey. Discrimination is discrimination.
    Hi. TOGTFO.

  3. #3
    Hi
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    26,225

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Layla_Z View Post
    My question is: Is there room for compromise in the gay marriage debate? Would it be acceptable to label all marriage (man and woman, or two men, or two women) a civil union for legal purposes. If I'm not mistaken now a couple is married once they sign the marriage certificate, the ceremony is secondary from a legal standpoint. So make all marriages a civil union in the eyes of the government with all the legal rights that go with it. Marriage would be a religious issue.
    There wasn't an option for government having nothing to do with any marriage.

    If I had my way the gov would not be in the business of issuing marriage licenses.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  4. #4
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,178

    Re: Civil Unions

    I chose "Gay couples should not be able to have the rights of marriage at all." sincei t comes closest to my views.

    I think marriage no matter what the **** name you slap on it is union between one man and one woman. Politicians who say "I think marriage is a union between a man and woman,but I support domestic partnerships,civil unions and etc(any other paper coated term for marriage)" are cowardice weasels who think voters are retarded enough to think that somehow calling the same thing by a different name somehow makes it different.

    If I crapped on the floor and call it a T-Bone steak, would you want to eat it? Hell no you wouldn't want to eat it. Because changing the name of it doesn't change what it, which it is **** on the floor. Why are people stupid enough to think some how changing the name of marriage or expanding the definition of marriage and calling it by a different name somehow makes it different? You either for gay marriage or you don't,using paper coated terms for marriage while claiming you support traditional marriage doesn't mean you support traditional marriage, it just means you are a sucker(if you are a politicians then you are a weasel exploiting suckers) who who buys into this nonsense that changing the name makes it different.
    Last edited by jamesrage; 03-05-09 at 11:33 PM.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  5. #5
    Every day I'm hustlin'..
    Lerxst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nationwide...
    Last Seen
    01-07-15 @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,067

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    I chose "Gay couples should not be able to have the rights of marriage at all." sincei t comes closest to my views.

    I think marriage no matter what the **** name you slap on it is union between one man and one woman. Politicians who say "I think marriage is a union between a man and woman,but I support domestic partnerships,civil unions and etc(any other paper coated term for marriage)" are cowardice weasels who think voters are retarded enough to think that somehow calling the same thing by a different name somehow makes it different.

    If I crapped on the floor and call it a T-Bone steak, would you want to eat it? Hell no you wouldn't want to eat it. Because changing the name of it doesn't change what it, which it is **** on the floor. Why are people stupid enough to think some how changing the name of marriage or expanding the definition of marriage and calling it by a different name somehow makes it different?
    Even though we have opposing views on the overall issue, I absolutely agree. Screw the semantics, it's marriage regardless of what you call it. There is no need for stupid word games. I just happen to believe that gays should be treated equally and have the same rights as straights.

    But then again I'm ****ing evil to the core because I'm a democrat and will dance my victory dance when Obama gets the launch codes and turns this country into a radiating ash heap.

    Hi. TOGTFO.

  6. #6
    King Of The Dog Pound

    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    30,693

    Re: Civil Unions

    Being a Christian I feel marriage is between a man and a woman. Call me old fashioned, but that is the way I see it.

    I also think homosexual couples in this country are being discriminated against because of government involvement in marriage.

    I try very hard not to let my religious morals interfere with this a secular government and it's laws. So I think civil unions for gay couples with the full rights of married straight couples would rectify that. Barring of course government getting the hell out of marriage all together. Which is the best solution.


    No Lives Matter

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 05:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Civil Unions

    I don't believe any of the options are satisfactory. There will always be heterosexual people who believe they and they alone are entitled to the institutions of love, and there will always be activists who are never satisfied with the rights that gays have. I believe the moderates on both sides were willing to compromise on this issue a long, long time ago... it's the extremists that are dragging it on and complicating matters.

    You could:
    1) Allow homo/hetero people to all use the term "marriage" legally while giving individual Churches the right to refuse to wed couples if they so choose.
    2) Create the term "civil union" for all people in the legal sense, leaving marriage to religious denominations that choose to use the term in the personal sense. The government shouldn't be controlling the term "marriage" if we are truly living in a secular setup.

    Moderates have agreed to these options a long time ago. Extremists will never be satisfied. The right wing extremists will never relinquish their monopoly on this institution, and the left wing extremists will never be happy until gays are fully en par with traditionalist values in the law.

    The solution is to simply moderate the LEGAL terminology, while leaving the traditionalist terminology to the Churches and individuals to use. The law need not mention it.

  8. #8
    Global Moderator
    Sinister
    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    133,637

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Layla_Z View Post
    My question is: Is there room for compromise in the gay marriage debate? Would it be acceptable to label all marriage (man and woman, or two men, or two women) a civil union for legal purposes. If I'm not mistaken now a couple is married once they sign the marriage certificate, the ceremony is secondary from a legal standpoint. So make all marriages a civil union in the eyes of the government with all the legal rights that go with it. Marriage would be a religious issue.
    This is precisely the position I hold and have posted on this forum for quite a while, now.
    "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"

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Last Seen
    05-06-11 @ 05:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,082

    Re: Civil Unions

    I don't see why married people, straight or gay, should have any privileges that single people don't have.

    The only people, straight or gay, who should have special privileges are people who take care of children.

  10. #10
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    38,474

    Re: Civil Unions

    Since when do the religious own the word marriage to the point where they and their books get to define what it means? Oh wait. They don't. Sorry. No compromise on this one.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 03-06-09 at 03:52 AM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

Page 1 of 35 12311 ... 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
  •