COMMENTS:
*Should read:
If same-sex couples are only to obtain the rights and benefits currently provided through marriage BY CIVIL UNIONS, so should it be for ALL couples.
Why not just the civil union if that would give them all the rights married couple has. I don't really see the difference actually, but I really don't know much about it, so I'll shutup.
No, larry, don't shut up, it's a valid question!
First of all, the civil unions are not designed to provide the same rights and benefits as marriages. Second, if a group that is in minority and/or has been treated unequally is to move toward equality, keeping this group separate is NOT going to help this happen.
I see what you mean, I guess if churches don't want to marry them they can go to city hall or other places you can get married without a minister. It would be kinda like divorced people are in some religions where they won't marry you if you were divorced. I never heard anyone complaining about that. I get your point.
Same sex marriage is legal in Canada I agree with that, the church is taking it to the supreme court so they cant be forced to perform them. I can understand that. Personally I still think marriage is just a paper and if people want to waste their time changing laws have fun.
by ABC on Wed Oct 20, 04 1:53pm
[+]
yeah abc, it is just a peice of paper, but it gives rights to people which they would not have without it. So either give the gays the same rights , or take away the rights marrage couples have.
by USMC on Wed Oct 20, 04 2:02pm
[+]
Exactly, USMC!
I didnt know it was different in the US, but in Canada, common law has the same rights as marriage.
by ABC on Wed Oct 20, 04 2:24pm
[+]
That's an improvement, however true equality should not have separation.
Yes, Canada is wayyy ahead of us, ABC!
We live in a country where the divorce rate is the only thing rising. We have television shows where total strangers are encouraged to meet, mingle and sometimes even marry, all for the benefit of ratings. And these are HETERO couples. We have NO right to say that ANY form of union is wrong, when we as a society have allowed the one form of union we take as "sacred" to become no more than a quaint joke. To all the moralists who say no to anything other than man/woman marriage, pick up your remotes, change the channel from "The Bachelor" and allow love to reign, regardless of your ingrained perceptions.
Again, morals confused with "the church".
On a purely financial point, recognized marriage will force companies to offer benefits to same-sex spouses which will increase costs and reduce our ability to compete in a world marketplace.
tadgerman,
That is a good point, however it is discriminatory to offer those benefits to heterosexual couples and not same-sex couples.
*morals confused with the church*
The argument of the church is the only I've seen of any reason. Subjective morals don't really have a place in this debate.
Okay, overnight somebody voted No - AND I have a VALID reason but forgot to provide it in the comment section... hmm...
yeah, sure. it'll make us all peachy happy. :)
yes the people all have the right to marry as long as they are otherwise able to contract. The right wingers have absolutely no right to tell people how to live their lives. they are so petty that any kind of deviation from the norm makes them shiver like forty pound children in a freezer.
Prime reason for Marriage between man & woman is for Procreation. Same sex couples can't procreate without outside help. So why should Civil Union receive the same privileges as Marriage?
|
