My Evolution on Same Sex Marriage, and Politics

[mondo joe]

As a gay man, as part of a same sex couple, and as a parent of 2 daughters, I have always been staunchly pro-same-sex-marriage - which is to say staunchly pro-equality.

I have, and still do, feel that civil unions are not equal to marriage. Not in practice, and not even in theory.

For the longest time I felt civil unions were not an acceptable alternative to marriage. And that is where my evolution in thought has come along.

Even though I know equal marriage rights are the only fair goal, I am now willing to accept civil unions as at least an interim. Though I have ideals, I am practical, and I see civil unions as the option with the most broad consensus.

More important than my ideals is the simple fact that for same sex couples who are real and living now - not hypothetical couples - there is a critical need for legal protection, even if it's not perfectly fair.

It may be in the United States that this is how progress is made - not in one smooth arc, and no in one fell swoop, but in something more like steps on a staircase - up, plateau, up, plateau, and so on.

I have been, and continue to be, gravely disappointed in the democratic party for being such cowards on this issue. And my disappointment is AS MUCH about the politics as about being gay.

The Dems have just been reactionary cowards, quick to say they don't support same sex marriage but not taking much of any real stance OTHER than that. I think there is enough consensus that same sex couples should have SOME legal status - even if only as a preemption against actual marriage - that it would be a reasonable position to call for civil unions.

Would it be fair? No. Would it be exploitive (especially arguing civil unions to prevent actual marriages)? Yes.

Would I be okay with it? I would.

[WCGreen]

1. Marriage today has devolved into a religious sanction...

I feel that stregthening the Civil Contract would be a boon to straight couple as well who don't feel comfortable in a "traditional" marriage...

Civil Union should, to be even considered, afford the exact same legal benifits as marriage does now...

Then a gay couple could enter into a civil union and then have a marriage ceremony performed by Churchs willing to perform a marriage...

No one should force a religion to marry anyone they don't wish to... That is the idea behind the seperation of Church and State... That the State makes no more that the most basic demands on a church and that the church makes no more demands on the State...

The only issue that I find uncomortable about gay marriage is that it will eventualy force churchs that do firmly believe that Marriage is a only legitamate for a man and a woman to accept the legitamcy of gay marriage in their church...

Other than that, Gay Couples should be able to, and are entitled to under the US Constitution, intwine and tangle up their lives legally as Hetro Couples have been doing for centuries...

[mondo joe]

2. Disagree,

Marriage is many things to many people. To some it's religious sanction, to others it's not.

That said, there are churches doing same sex ceremonies already. And there is NOTHING about asme sex marriage that will force any church to accept it. They can disregard it all they like, like they can any other marriage.

[WCGreen]

5. That is what I meant...

A civil union would recognize the legal contract while any church could perform a ceremony...

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. "The only issue that I find uncomortable about gay marriage is that it will eventualy force

churchs that do firmly believe that Marriage is a only legitamate for a man and a woman to accept the legitamcy of gay marriage in their church..."

Why? This is why we have a separation of church and state. A church does not have to recognise a civil marriage as legitimate any more than the Catholic church has the recognise the ligitimacy of a civil divorce. If a gay couple wants to start a fight with their church over their status, that's between them and their church, and the government has no say over it. If the church won't come around, they can find a different church. Churches, unlike corporations, do not have personhood. They cannot be made to integrate, accept gays, even license their day cares. In return, they don't pay taxes.

Anyone why tells you that your church will be forced to accept gay marriage is lying.

[WCGreen]

4. There could be law suits...

It's not a great fear... But it will be challanged... After all, we live in a law suit crazy country....

I did include the seperation of church and state in arguement...

I am just trying to look ahead...

[Critters2]

7. No court will hear such a suit. nt

[WCGreen]

13. You don't think there are judges is some jurisdictions

that will hear a case such as this....

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. Any such suit would be thrown out - it is such a flagrant breech of

the first amendment that only a fool would even attempt it. There is literally hundreds of years of precedent. The state cannot force any church to accept anyone as a member, nor can it have any say in the tenets of any religion.

No. It would not be thrown out. It would be laughed out.

ON EDIT:

Of course, the reverse is also valid -- the state does not have to accept any church marriage as valid, if it doesn't comply with the laws of the state. As noted above, many churches perform marriage ceremonies for gays, but that doesn't make them married in the eyes of the law -- my sister and her partner are having a commitment ceremony next spring, and though they see themselves as being married, North Carolina will disagree. By that same token, the pedophile cults that have men marrying 13yr old girls are not performing legal marriages.

If civil unions grant full rights, priveledges and responsibilites to gay couples, in the eyes of the law it is a marriage whether they call it that or not. A civil union which does not do so is not a marriage. A rose by any other name is still a rose, but a carnation will never be a rose.

[mondo joe]

10. This is already determined. No church is forced to marry

anyone if it refuses to do so.

[Critters2]

6. It's bullshit

I can refuse to marry anyone who asks me to officiate--because I think they're too young, they're not a good match, I'm busy that Saturday, I don't want to. I don't have to give a reason, and I can't be forced to do it. So some clergy will turn away gay couples the way they turn away those who live together before the wedding, those who won't go through a pre-marriage class, those who won't pay, whomever. The state doesn't force us to do perfectly legal marriages we don't want to do now, it won't force us when gays can marry.

I am sick of people raising this issue.

[WCGreen]

12. I didn't mean it the way you took it....

I am sure there will be people somewhere that will try to test the issue in the courts if it becomes law...

I am not saying anything about the validity of the claims...

Cause if you look you will see how I worded the response...

[Katzenjammer]

8. The Dems should support the Constitution: Full Faith And Credit

The fact that they allow the GOP to frame it up as a "gay marriage" issue is S-T-U-P-I-D along with cowardly and ugly.

Full faith and credit is PART OF THE GODDAMNED CONSTITUTION! What's so hard to support about that?

[KittyWampus]

11. Civil Unions For EVERYONE who want CIVIL Rights. Forget Marriage

a Marriage ceremony should be purely optional.

[WCGreen]

14. Exactly.....

[SidDithers]

15. Call it Civil Marriage..

and let the ceremony be performed by whomever wants to do it. And don't force anyone to perform a ceremony they don't want to. Seems simple enough to me.

Sid

[cap]

16. my feeling is that civil unions are like ...

being at a dinner table and being handed a smaller portion of what everyone else is eating. It took a long time to get to the dinner table, but I'm still hungry. Glad to have something because I was starving but really want the whole banana. Want to thank those who helped me get seated at the table because I was absent for so long. Dont want to annoy those who got me to the table but I am still hungry and will still request more.