Originally Posted by opie
Why redefine the opportunity? Its already defined in our founding documents.
The Government shouldnt be giving anything, simply recognizing the union of 2 people. Call it whatever you want. I realize much of the hubbub is whether its marriage or civil unions... Frankly I dont care. So long as they are afforded the same benefits and privileges as anyone that is involved in a traditional marriage.
I agree "marriage" takes place in a church. So addressing the Government to define it is asinine at best. The reason the homosexual crowd is lobbying the Government in the first place is because there are enough people in the US that do not want to extended the same benefits and privileges to homosexual couples as hetero couples. When it comes to things like survivors benefits, health insurance and retirement benefits... Most of these things recognize a "marriage." But you dont want to call it that, you would rather call it a civil union. Ok, Blue Cross doesnt recognize a civil union (I dont really know, just using it as an example) So Joe and Jim are being denied the same benefits that Joe and Mary get to enjoy. Thats called discrimination and we have been fighting all forms of discrimination for a long time.
I agree with this. I also think that some churches that are more liberal would perform gay marriages. Why should it have to be called something different and have another set of documents (like marriage license, civil union license). I think making those differences doesn't do anything but add cost to the process.
If people are gay why should I care? If they are happy and they aren't molesting the innocent or committing a crime, I say go for it.