Are you for Civil Unions with the same benefits as marriage, the only difference being the name of the institution?
Yes, or no?
No for two reasons
1.) civil unions CURRENTLY are NOT has stong or equal to marriage law wise. Unions have been defeated in the death/sickness when dealing with wills, property, money, life care needs etc.
2.) If you make them legally equal than theres absolutley no logical reason to call them by another name, thats dumb and discrimination.
yes. i find them an elegant compromise; just as i found DADT to be a good compromise.
No. Because it is nothing more than a paper coated term for marriage. Its a way for closet gay marriage supporters in office to legalize gay marriage while appeasing suckers who fall for the little con job. If a call a pile of cow manure a t-bone steak will you want to eat it? No because of regardless of what I call it is still a pile a cow manure. Calling marriage a civil union, domestic partnership or some other politically correct term meant to appease those who say they are against gay marriage does not change the fact it is still a marriage. I used to be one of those suckers who fell for that if we just give them the same benefits as marriage but not call it marriage then it is not gay marriage.
I agree, but the question wasn't directed towards you though
I think it should be called the exact same thing for both. I think it should either be gov't recognized marriage for everybody, gov't recognized civil unions for everybody, or nothing.
Didn't vote as I'm obviously not against same sex marriage. Just thought I'd give my two cents.
awwwww why not
I answered anyway :2razz:
And why should I not be able to have atleast the same legal benefits as straight people again.....exactly?
I THINK you are misunderstanding him, THINK? not sure
I THINK you are misunderstanding him, THINK? not sure
She is not misunderstanding him. He called all legally sanctioned gay relationships "cow manure". I don't think he could have been more explicit about how he felt.
SHe is not misunderstanding him. He called all legally sanctioned gay relationships "cow manure". I don't think he could have been more explicit about how he felt.
And why should I not be able to have atleast the same legal benefits as straight people again.....exactly?
Are you saying the law bans you from marrying someone of the opposite gender? Or that you can not leave a will, give power or attorney to the person of your choosing?
I'm saying that I will never want, or have the desire to marry someone of the opposite gender, and that there are benefits that marriage provides that I right now can't have. And even if I could, why should I have to go through more trouble to get those than other couples?
Are you saying the law bans you from marrying someone of the opposite gender? Or that you can not leave a will, give power or attorney to the person of your choosing?
I'm saying that I will never want, or have the desire to marry someone of the opposite gender, and that there are benefits that marriage provides that I right now can't have. And even if I could, why should I have to go through more trouble to get those than other couples?
No for two reasons
1.) civil unions CURRENTLY are NOT has stong or equal to marriage law wise. Unions have been defeated in the death/sickness when dealing with wills, property, money, life care needs etc.
2.) If you make them legally equal than theres absolutley no logical reason to call them by another name, thats dumb and discrimination.
I am not married and I would like those benefits too why should I have to go through more trouble than married people to get those benefits?
Then we should call homosexuality and heterosexuality just sexuality, right?