Christians Supporting Gay Marriage

[belverron]

You're right, Prometheus. If that kind of arrangement were more common, the cost of the documents would be negligible. Right now it just doesn't work out that well. And of course we'd have to make sure the documents were actually honored. Again, that probably wouldn't be a problem if it were a more commonplace occurence.

[belverron]

You're really starting to piss me off, Vicchio >.<

Neither of us is talking about giving marriage to same-sex couples. So get over it.

[Prometheus]

Pro, the problem with that is that Gay couples want the legal rights such as medical insurance, and the like that married couples now get.

The issue won't go away, the Gay Activist push "gay marriage" in everyones face so harshly that even liberal states like Oregon rejected them, but a move to giv ehtem the legal status without making it into altering "marriage" would work. It's that or we fight this damn fight every election cycle listening to BS from both sides.

Whoah - I have never been called a "pro" before. Awesome.

Anyway -

Isn't marriage in a legal sence kind of artificial these days? As a religious person, I think you can agree with me that the legal definition has no real resemblance to what we personaly believe union between a man and womon ought to be.

Is this not a personal, religious issue? Why should government have a say in it? Why should buisinesses give discounts based on an essentially religious and/or moralistic interpersonal arrangement? If marriage were not a legal issue, this type of discrimination would end.

Any type of person ought t be able to cohabitate and share assets in any way they see fit. They should be able to call it whatever they want. But the government should not be enforcing it.

[Prometheus]

Neither of us is talking about giving marriage to same-sex couples. So get over it.

If the government is going to be involved in marriages, why shouldn't gays get it too? Get the government out of marriage and we can forget about debating gay and plural marriage. It's a personal issue.

[belverron]

If the government is going to be involved in marriages, why shouldn't gays get it too? Get the government out of marriage and we can forget about debating gay and plural marriage. It's a personal issue.

Now we're on the same page.

[Mr.Vicchio]

You're really starting to piss me off, Vicchio >.<

Neither of us is talking about giving marriage to same-sex couples. So get over it.

I was commenting on the issue of "marriage" or Civil Unions.

Pointing out, or atleast trying to, that Marriage is a man woman thing to many, and isntead of all this dicking about the issue, just give gays "civil unions" and leave the word Marriage out of it... issue solved.

Both sides win, if you start messing with the definition of "marriage" it causes more problems then it solves.

[belverron]

Pointing out, or atleast trying to, that Marriage is a man woman thing to many, and isntead of all this dicking about the issue, just give gays "civil unions" and leave the word Marriage out of it... issue solved.

Issue not solved, Vicchio. There's still the inequality of "marriage" and "civil unions" to deal with.

I like Prometheus's idea much better, and government offering only civil unions comes in a close second.

[Prometheus]

I was commenting on the issue of "marriage" or Civil Unions.

Pointing out, or atleast trying to, that Marriage is a man woman thing to many, and isntead of all this dicking about the issue, just give gays "civil unions" and leave the word Marriage out of it... issue solved.

Both sides win, if you start messing with the definition of "marriage" it causes more problems then it solves.

So basically you want to give them the same thing but call it by a different name? Lets lose the banal word games.

[Savant]

If civil unions became the option that offered equality to all families, my wife and I would get a divorce in a heartbeat! It would actually be a very romantic ordeal...

(technicly marriage has been altered to prevent gay marriage. For or against - both options involved altering "marriage". I love that conservatism so often mean preserving things the way they never were,,, Anyhow, if the meaning of mariage has to evolve, I'd much rather see it take the loving path, then be altered out of spite...)

[Mr.Vicchio]

Sigh.

What inequality Belverrone? In a name? Gvie me a break would ya? Civili Union = Marriage sans the word "marriage" for legal intents and purposes. So there is no inequality. Next.

As for the word game Prometheus... why did Gay Marriage fail in ever state it's been tried via refferendum? Oh because the majority of Americans have an affinity for "marriage" and don't want it messed with.

So your plan of removing the name wouldn't fly either. So your solution is a non-solution.

I am offering a reasonable comprimise that give both sides what they want. Homosexuals want the rights and legal status of Marriage, most Americans want "Marriage" to mean a man and a woman.

Damn, why is that so freaking hard for people to understand?

There is no inequality if both Civil Unions and Marriage confer the same Rights and Legal Standing.

If you try and alter "Marriage" the public has shown time and again they won't stand for it.

So QUIT mucking with marriage and comprimise. You WON'T get people to accept Gay Marriage, and you WON'T get them to remove the term either. Get it? You're both pushing losing causes for.. what? A word? Why?

[fedfem]

I was commenting on the issue of "marriage" or Civil Unions.

Pointing out, or atleast trying to, that Marriage is a man woman thing to many, and isntead of all this dicking about the issue, just give gays "civil unions" and leave the word Marriage out of it... issue solved.

Both sides win, if you start messing with the definition of "marriage" it causes more problems then it solves.

Isn't is YOUR side that wants to amend the Constitution to define marriage?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Yep. They want Marriage to be defined as a "Man and a Woman"

Kinda proves my point about how strongly the sentiment is to leave the definition alone.

Don't get rid of it, don't add more to it, leave it alone.

Fine.

Homosexuals want the legal status and rights of marriage. Great.

Call it civil Unions, ignore the term marriage, and you win an inroad. Gay Marriage will happen one day, but I think we are 10-15 years off. At the least. the more the Gay Activist slam Gay Marriage the more likely that amendment has of passing.