• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Which of the following would be acceptable?

Which of the following would be acceptable? Please read post for explanations.

  • Civil marriage rights for everyone, gay or straight

  • Everyone has a civil union; marriage is no longer a legal term, just a religious one

  • SS couples can have civil unions = to marriage, but marriage still only for heterosexuals

  • SS couples can have civil unions as they are now (unequal); marriage only for heterosexuals

  • No legal recognition whatsoever for same sex couples

  • Other legal solution/option, please post


Results are only viewable after voting.

ChristianCenturion

Veteran / Tuebor
Feb 9, 2005
14,207
576
In front of a computer
✟40,488.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Maize said:
Shouldn't the burden of proof be on those who wish to discriminate and deny equal protections to all citizens?

Show me a current government that recognized EVERY model of marriage possible. IOW - drop the rhetoric and misapplication of "equal".
 
Upvote 0

Caylin

Formerly Dracon427
Feb 15, 2004
7,066
316
41
Olympia, Washington
✟31,514.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship


Same thing in Texas recently. Any and all contracts that approximate marrige are illegal now.
 
Upvote 0

Maize

Unitarian Universalist
Jan 10, 2005
406
24
50
VA
Visit site
✟23,214.00
Faith
Unitarian
ChristianCenturion said:
Show me a current government that recognized EVERY model of marriage possible. IOW - drop the rhetoric and misapplication of "equal".
Same-sex marriages are recognized in the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Canada, and the U.S. state of Massachusetts.
 
Upvote 0

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,426
7,164
74
St. Louis, MO.
✟423,719.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Maize said:

It's just different terminology because I've had many people tell me they are not against equal rights, but have issues with calling it marriage. I'm trying to give them an appropriate option to choose.

I see. Thanks for the clarification.

But as the Bard said, "What's in a name?" Does any state recognize a purely religious marriage? That is, would any couple be considered married if they had only a religious ceremony, without a marriage license? Some states may have a common-law exception, but AFAIK, those can be subject to challenge. All government recognized marriage, in the legal sense, is a civil marriage. And I just don't see any compelling reason for denying this to same-sex couples.
 
Upvote 0

Maize

Unitarian Universalist
Jan 10, 2005
406
24
50
VA
Visit site
✟23,214.00
Faith
Unitarian
jayem said:
I see. Thanks for the clarification.

But as the Bard said, "What's in a name?" Does any state recognize a purely religious marriage? That is, would any couple be considered married if they had only a religious ceremony, without a marriage license?
No. Civil marriage (or civil unions) is separate from religious marriage ceremonies. You can have a religious ceremony now (indeed many same sex couples do in welcoming churches) but it is not recognized by the government unless you sign that piece of paper, which of course same sex couples are denied.
 
Upvote 0

Maize

Unitarian Universalist
Jan 10, 2005
406
24
50
VA
Visit site
✟23,214.00
Faith
Unitarian
Dracon427 said:
Same thing in Texas recently. Any and all contracts that approximate marrige are illegal now.
And in Ohio their amendment has been used even against straight couples who are not married. Domestic abuse charges against men beating up their girlfriends have been thrown out of court, citing the marriage amendment (which was intended only to hurt gays and lesbians, but has proven to have much farther reaching consequences once it was put into practice).
 
Upvote 0

Maize

Unitarian Universalist
Jan 10, 2005
406
24
50
VA
Visit site
✟23,214.00
Faith
Unitarian
KCDAD said:
NO marriage, no benefits, no inheritance, no civil unions.
Why should the goverment treat your family and children differently than mine? What does it gain from doing that? What do you gain from our being treated as second-class citizens and being denied legal protections?

Either choose your mates carefully or not at all.
We choose just as well as heterosexuals do (or don't).
 
Upvote 0

ChristianCenturion

Veteran / Tuebor
Feb 9, 2005
14,207
576
In front of a computer
✟40,488.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Maize said:
Same-sex marriages are recognized in the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Canada, and the U.S. state of Massachusetts.

And?
That only proves my point, I said ALL.
Apparently, you are unaware of how many types of marriage are possible ~ a brief sampling.
 
Upvote 0

Maize

Unitarian Universalist
Jan 10, 2005
406
24
50
VA
Visit site
✟23,214.00
Faith
Unitarian
ChristianCenturion said:
And?
That only proves my point, I said ALL.
Apparently, you are unaware of how many types of marriage are possible ~ a brief sampling.

And?

I thought we were talking about marriage rights for same sex couples..... if you want to talk about all types of marriages, be my guest, but that's not the topic of this discussion.
 
Upvote 0

Rae

Pro-Marriage. All marriage.
Aug 31, 2002
7,798
408
52
Somewhere out there...
Visit site
✟33,246.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Married
Only 1 and 2. History has shown in the United States that "separate but equal" is not equal. Or, as Dave Barry says in his book Dave Barry Slept Here (paraphrased from memory), "Under separate but equal, black people had Separate facilities that were Equal to the facilities white people used for their domestic animals."

No thanks. Either true equality, or let's show it for what it is, immoral discrimination against good people. None of this "it's really the same, but it's different" nonsense.
 
Upvote 0

KCDAD

Well-Known Member
Aug 4, 2005
12,546
372
70
Illinois
✟14,800.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

Whoa there turbo... don't get all militant with me. Did I say no marriage for gays? I said no marriage period. NO benefits for anyone for living with someone, legal or otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

Maize

Unitarian Universalist
Jan 10, 2005
406
24
50
VA
Visit site
✟23,214.00
Faith
Unitarian
KCDAD said:
Whoa there turbo... don't get all militant with me. Did I say no marriage for gays? I said no marriage period. NO benefits for anyone for living with someone, legal or otherwise.



I apologize. My defenses are always up on this forum. (Thus why I don't come here very often, not good for my blood pressure).

You have an interesting idea. How do you think it would go over in the public?
 
Upvote 0

KCDAD

Well-Known Member
Aug 4, 2005
12,546
372
70
Illinois
✟14,800.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Maize said:


I apologize. My defenses are always up on this forum. (Thus why I don't come here very often, not good for my blood pressure).

You have an interesting idea. How do you think it would go over in the public?

well, for centuries it was the only way things were... marriage was initiated to protect property... since wives are no longer property (in this culture)... what's the point?
 
Upvote 0

ChristianCenturion

Veteran / Tuebor
Feb 9, 2005
14,207
576
In front of a computer
✟40,488.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

Ah, the old aggression of the minority tactic.
No need to plead a case when one can threaten the majority with "either give us our demands or we will vilify you."
 
Upvote 0

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,426
7,164
74
St. Louis, MO.
✟423,719.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
KCDAD said:
NO marriage, no benefits, no inheritance, no civil unions.

You want power of attorney, fine
You want a will, fine.

Either choose your mates carefully or not at all.


I agree, an interesting idea. It would be a definite incentive to plan one's affairs carefully. Everything now taken for granted by being married would need to be explicitly specified by contract. So if a man and woman were planning a life together, they'd need to state in writing things like possession and control of assets, child custody, decision making if one partner should be incapacitated, inheritance, eligibility to receive employment/insurance/social security benefits, etc.
It sounds like a full employment act for lawyers. I also suppose there would also be no reduced tax rates for "married" couples filing jointly.

Very interesting concept, but I think it's a little too radical for now.
 
Upvote 0

suzybeezy

Reports Manager
Nov 1, 2004
56,899
4,485
57
USA
✟82,735.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
MOD HAT ON

Please take a few minutes to include the required citations in your posts. This thread will be reviewed in 24 hours and posts that don't include citaitons will be removed.

4.2 You will restrict any posts about the following controversial topics to the Ethics & Morality, Liberal Theology or Christian Philosophy forums, or any subforums in the Congregation/Recovery section:
a. drug use.
b. gambling.
c. polygamy.
d. extramarital sexual activity.
e. abortion.
f. homosexuality.
g. transsexuality.
This site uses the scriptural definition of marriage which is a union between a man and a woman. In addition, the debate of the morality of the above topics must be backed by evidence complete with citations. Standard citations are acceptable but links are preferred. The above topics are also disallowed in profile entries including avatars and signatures as these are not intended to be used in such a manner.

MOD HAT OFF
 
Upvote 0