• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

For people who are against Same Sex Marriage.

Are you for Civil Unions?

  • Total voters
    10
Your Star

Your Star

Rage More!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
27,392
Reaction score
20,164
Location
Georgia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Socialist
Are you for Civil Unions with the same benefits as marriage, the only difference being the name of the institution?

Yes, or no?
 
I would say yes. I am pro-civil unions. I may not believe homosexual relationships can be properly defined as marriage, but I support their rights to have equal benefits and to live happily together as legally recognized partners.
 
yes. i find them an elegant compromise; just as i found DADT to be a good compromise.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
Your Star said:
Are you for Civil Unions with the same benefits as marriage, the only difference being the name of the institution?

Yes, or no?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Centrist77 said:
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.
Click to expand...

I agree, but the question wasn't directed towards you though ;)
 
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.
 
cpwill said:
yes. i find them an elegant compromise; just as i found DADT to be a good compromise.
Click to expand...

What a you can have your marriage but you just can't call it marriage?
 
jamesrage said:
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.
Click to expand...

And why should I not be able to have atleast the same legal benefits as straight people again.....exactly?
 
CompSciGuy said:
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.
Click to expand...

I share this view.

The government should not discriminate based on sex.
 
Your Star said:
And why should I not be able to have atleast the same legal benefits as straight people again.....exactly?
Click to expand...

I THINK you are misunderstanding him, THINK? not sure
 
Centrist77 said:
I THINK you are misunderstanding him, THINK? not sure
Click to expand...

He 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.
 
CriticalThought said:
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.
Click to expand...

If thats true I was wrong and I stand correct and he IS for discrimination.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
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.
Click to expand...

Fixed that :2razz:
 
Your Star said:
And why should I not be able to have atleast the same legal benefits as straight people again.....exactly?
Click to expand...

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?
 
jamesrage said:
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?
Click to expand...

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?
 
Your Star said:
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?
Click to expand...

Wait wait wait wait. Are you seriously saying that gay people are innately and fundamentally attracted to people of the same sex? That's it's part of the functional definition of gay? And that in the natural state (state free from force) gay people would naturally and innately choose people of the same sex to marry? And since that is the natural state, anything which causes deviation from it (such as preventing one from marrying the person they would naturally choose) would require the use of outside force? Yeah right. Next you're going to say that the Marriage License is the legal contractual form through which government force is applied to same sex couples thus preventing them from achieving legal marriage status. What? That doesn't make sense. You have the same rights as everyone else; you can marry a guy. I don't even see why you're bitching.
 
jamesrage said:
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?
Click to expand...

LMAO!
just like with blacks and water fountains and bathrooms, we arent keeping you from drinking water or taking a leak you just have to do it over there boy!


what a joke
 
Your Star said:
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?
Click to expand...

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?
 
Centrist77 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Then we should call homosexuality and heterosexuality just sexuality, right?
 
jamesrage said:
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?
Click to expand...

Those benefits are designed for couples, and LGBT couples are being denied those benefits simply by the fact who they choose to couple with. What is your reasoning to deny LGBT people those benefits?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom