Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex
Seems to me that truly devout Christians are offended by homosexuality, period.  |
Most are. But some are capable of separating their religious views from questions of civil liberties.
Quote:
|
Personally, I am not opposed to gay unions and have no bias against homosexuals. I simply prefer clarity of language. As far as I am concerned, same sex unions are not 'marriages' therefore they should not be called marriages. Marriage is reserved for one man and one woman, period. I see myself as a traditionalist on this issue.
|
At this moment it is reserved for one man and one woman. At various times in history it has meant many different things. The fact that it has a present meaning is not, in itself, a rational argument for keeping it unchanged.
Quote:
|
I would imagine that most gays would be thrilled to accept 'civil unions' (or something similar) that offered the same legal protections/benefits as marriage. So what's the big hangup?
|
Giving it a different name allows for the possibility of changes in the law at any time so as to make the civil union inferior to "marriage". Just as I said in my last post.
I see no good reason to establish two institutions when one will work better.