Reply #49: I'm not convinced that pushing for civil unions is either...

[benevolent dictator]

regardless of whether or not everyone gets them.

The RW just doesn't want us to have rights, they aren't going to let us have them just because we call them something else. If you have gay and lesbian only civil unions, that's back to the "separate but equal" thing, plus it opens up the doors for all kinds of harassment and discrimination. If everyone gets civil unions, then the RW will claim you're attacking the entire institution of marriage by trying to make it a marginal part of society and not it's "foundation." They aren't going to be like, "Oh, OK! That's a great idea, why didn't we think of that?? We'll ALL get "civil unions" for the rights and then whomever wants to can then get "married" in the church! Brilliant!"

Somehow... I just don't see that happening. Ever.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I wouldn't turn down civil unions if they were suddenly offered in my state, but I don't see pushing for civil unions for everyone to be any more effective than pushing for marriage equality. In fact it's probably less effective, because first you have to convince LGBT people to go along with it, then you have to convince a bunch of happily married heteros to go along with it. Good luck.