A rose by any other name: unions versus marriages - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 10-10-2004, 01:43 PM
Veggie Regular
 
beforewisdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,190
In the various debates I have read about gay marriage a few people have mentioned that they do not have a problem with gay unions, but they want the word "marriage" to be reserved for heterosexual couples.



How do queer people feel about this?



If there was a legal institution known as a "union" that was legally identical to "marriage" would you be happy or would you feel like you were short changed?

My Blog: beforewisdom.com
beforewisdom is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 10-10-2004, 01:45 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Walter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 7,866
I don't think that seperate but equal is a good way to go.
Walter is offline  
#3 Old 10-10-2004, 02:20 PM
Veggie Regular
 
kpickell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 16,090
I agree with mikie. I don't like it.
kpickell is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#4 Old 10-10-2004, 02:45 PM
Veggie Regular
 
superjane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 828
If it was really about semantics, then my arguement makes more sense:

I think the difference in definition between 'marriage under God' and 'marriage under the law' is more significant than 'gay' or 'hetero' marriage.



Two non-religious women get married by a justice of the peace. A non-religious man and woman get married by a justice of the peace. Same thing.



Two Christian men get married by a pastor. A Christian man and woman get married by a pastor. Same thing- the people feel it's the same thing-getting God's blessing to commit to each other their love...yadda yadda. Whether or not thier particular church condones it is up to the church.



My point is that it makes more sense that the word 'marriage' should be reserved for people who believe in God, and all us athiests or agnostics should be joined in 'civil unions.'



That's how I see it, at least for the Christian religion. I cannot comment on other religions, because I don't know what they consider 'marriage' to be.



This is why I think the whole debate about gay marriage is BS. It has nothing to do with 'marriage', it's just about fear.



I hope that made some sense...
superjane is offline  
#5 Old 10-10-2004, 03:10 PM
Veggie Regular
 
beforewisdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by superjane View Post


This is why I think the whole debate about gay marriage is BS. It has nothing to do with 'marriage', it's just about fear.



I hope that made some sense...



Only the U.S. Mint makes cents

My Blog: beforewisdom.com
beforewisdom is offline  
#6 Old 10-10-2004, 04:35 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Dirty Martini's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 8,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by beforewisdom View Post

In the various debates I have read about gay marriage a few people have mentioned that they do not have a problem with gay unions, but they want the word "marriage" to be reserved for heterosexual couples.



I'd like to hear these people define the distinction and why they believe civil unions are ok but marriage is not.



personally, I think the "civil unions are ok but not marriage" excuse is a bunch of rhetoric that people have adopted to try & hide prejudice against l/g/b's. Kind of like the "I'm not racist, but" preface to a racist statement.
Dirty Martini is offline  
#7 Old 10-10-2004, 05:35 PM
Veggie Regular
 
AccidentalVeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,491
Marriage is marriage. Fair is fair. These are humans who deserve the same rights as all other humans. To marry. To have children. To be there for each other at the hospital. To inherit each other's things when they die. All of it. Religion has too prominent a place in American legalities like marriage. It is a civil union in the government's eyes but is called marriage. Everyone should be allowed to do it if they want to. Married people tend to be solid taxpayers. They tend to provide stable homes for their children. It is to be encouraged. God is not in charge of the government. Supposedly WE are. Let's attempt to treat everyone equally. Enough with half-measures that appease the freaked-out religious right. Gay people did not just occur ten years ago. They have been here all along. As long as there have been humans. Attempting to achieve all the dreams that heteros have of home and family and love. I wish some of us would just get over the fact of their existence and end this last bit of flagrant discrimination so we can get to work on the less flagrant but still all-too-real discriminations still tarnishing this wonderful country.



Steps off soapbox to go make dinner.



d
AccidentalVeg is offline  
#8 Old 10-10-2004, 05:43 PM
Veggie Regular
 
beforewisdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by OregonAmy View Post

I'd like to hear these people define the distinction and why they believe civil unions are ok but marriage is not.



There arguments were roughly that "marriage" is a religious institution defined by their church and defined to be a hetero union. While these people wanted gays to have a legally/socially recognizable union they felt that having "gay marriages" was a matter of people redefining their religion for them.

My Blog: beforewisdom.com
beforewisdom is offline  
#9 Old 10-10-2004, 05:48 PM
Veggie Regular
 
clickman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by beforewisdom View Post

Only the U.S. Mint makes cents



You should be banned, just for that reallllly bad joke



My dad is one of those people who thinks it should be legally equal, but not called marriage. I completely disagree. I don't think seperate but equal is at all wise. Nobodys saying the Church has to go and change what it defines as marriage, even though there's no legitimate reason to say it's for het. couples only.
clickman is offline  
#10 Old 10-10-2004, 08:16 PM
Veggie Regular
 
ug333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 991
My thought is this: If we are going to call them "Civil Unions", and call all hetero marriages "Civil Unions" too, fine. I don't care what the government calls them. If this helps some people seperate law from religion, so be it. I personally don't get it, but whatever.



For the government to have two different names is a really bad idea. It just begs for prejudice. Like said above, seperate but equal has been proven to be bad already. Someday, our grandchildren will look in the history books and wonder how people could have been so bigotted.
ug333 is offline  
#11 Old 10-10-2004, 09:03 PM
Veggie Regular
 
superjane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally Posted by beforewisdom View Post

There arguments were roughly that "marriage" is a religious institution defined by their church and defined to be a hetero union. While these people wanted gays to have a legally/socially recognizable union they felt that having "gay marriages" was a matter of people redefining their religion for them.



I agree- and if this is their argument- that 'marriage' is a religious institution defined by the church- then I should never be considered married (I am straight) because I am totally non-religious and would not feel blessed by God. Yet, I would be considered married by the law- and the church would not argue this. Therefore, it is hypocritical for religious people to accept someone like me being 'married', since I go against their definition, but then they use the definition excuse to argue against gay marriage.



And if they are ok with me getting 'married' legally, then they should admit that there are already two different definitions of marriage, and therefore, gays should be able to marry under the legal definition of marriage. If the church does not want to let gay people get married under the religious definition, **** 'em, the church is allowed to discriminate- isn't that it's purpose- but the law isn't.



p.s. if someone understands what I am saying and can put it more eloquently, I would appreciate that. People I talk to about this don't understand my angle because I'm not good at making things clear, even though in my head I make perfect sense!
superjane is offline  
#12 Old 10-10-2004, 09:26 PM
Veggie Regular
 
rainbowmoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 4,204
I believe that gay marriage should be allowed, but that if a church chooses not to marry a gay couple that is their right and they should not be forced to allow it. Many churches wouldn't marry my Mom and Dad because one is Catholic and the other Baptist, and I think churches have the right to make these distinctions as private organizations.

Nontheless, I think the courts/governments should honor the rights of gay people to be married. Separate but equal was ruled constitutionally NOT OK...we can't just choose where we want that to apply and where we would rather leave it out.
rainbowmoon is offline  
#13 Old 10-10-2004, 09:47 PM
Veggie Regular
 
prairie_girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 618
maybe i'm naive. i just don't see what the big deal is. i want to marry a woman who treats me wonderfully and who I love to death. why the F*CK is it anyone else's business?
prairie_girl is offline  
#14 Old 10-10-2004, 09:53 PM
Veggie Regular
 
rainbowmoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 4,204
The issue, prarie girl, is basically the religious and societial concept that marriage is a union between a man and a woman, under God. There may just be more people in the U.S. who believe this and also who feel it is something vital to protect. I disagree, but no man is an island- we are all, more or less, subject to the ideas, beliefs, and dogmas of the societies we live in.

I am not totally sure how I feel about homosexuality, even though I am in favor for gay marriage. Its not easy for everyone, for a lot of people homosexuality isn't an easy concept to grasp and it threatens what people believe about things. This causes a hostile response. I'm not saying this to be hostile towards you in the least- I just think that until people take time to understand both sides of an argument and be open minded in that way, positive solutions/understandings will be difficult to come by.
rainbowmoon is offline  
#15 Old 10-10-2004, 10:32 PM
Veggie Regular
 
MollyGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,159
This drives me insane. No privileges should be reserved for heterosexuals, even if it's just a word. That goes against everything America is supposed to stand for. (Hello, equal rights? Separation of church and state?)



Either it's all civil unions or it's all marriage, as far as I'm concerned. I want my friends and family members to have the same rights I do. I don't care how anyone feels about homosexuality--no one's feelings should have any bearing on what is fundamentally an issue of equal rights.
MollyGoat is offline  
#16 Old 10-10-2004, 10:43 PM
Veggie Regular
 
superjane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 828
why is marriage such a privilege? What difference does it make if you're 'officially' married or not? This is not a statement of my opinion, it's an honest question. I'm not married, nor have I ever met anyone worth marrying, so I don't understand why some people do it, especially those who are totally non-religious. What extra meaning does it give?
superjane is offline  
#17 Old 10-11-2004, 12:03 AM
Veggie Regular
 
AccidentalVeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by superjane View Post

why is marriage such a privilege? What difference does it make if you're 'officially' married or not? This is not a statement of my opinion, it's an honest question. I'm not married, nor have I ever met anyone worth marrying, so I don't understand why some people do it, especially those who are totally non-religious. What extra meaning does it give?



I assume you understand about the legal rights of married couples versus unmarried, right? Married status confers legal and financial benefits for taxes, retirement, property ownership, inheritance, insurance rates, family and medical care, even car rentals. Let's not forget adoption, child custody, and sponsorship of a non-American partner.



The "extra meaning" is all yours to bring to the idea of being married. As an atheist I don't really believe in the holy union part but I can understand people wanting to declare a lasting commitment to each other in front of friends and family. I think lasting commitements are too few and far between in this world. I would like to see such commitments encouraged in all people, gay or straight. I say this as a divorced person too !



d
AccidentalVeg is offline  
#18 Old 10-11-2004, 12:14 AM
Veggie Regular
 
kpickell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 16,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainbowmoon View Post

I believe that gay marriage should be allowed, but that if a church chooses not to marry a gay couple that is their right and they should not be forced to allow it.



I agree.
kpickell is offline  
#19 Old 10-11-2004, 04:33 AM
Veggie Regular
 
schu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by kpickell View Post

I agree.



me too
schu is offline  
#20 Old 10-11-2004, 06:24 AM
Veggie Regular
 
renaissancesun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,791
As usual, I can't remember my sources to back myself up on this.



I heard a while back, on NPR, some people talking about this exact topic. I think I remember one of them saying that civil union does NOT offer all of the same benefits as marriage in all states and that even in the ones where it does, that could change. Sooooo, even if people start out with civil unions being the same thing as marriage with only the difference of religious blessing, the law could be later changed in regard to the equal legal status of civil unions and marriage.



Hmmmmmm.



Words are important, I think.



Sunny
renaissancesun is offline  
#21 Old 10-11-2004, 07:57 AM
Veggie Regular
 
ug333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 991
Quote:
Originally Posted by superjane View Post


p.s. if someone understands what I am saying and can put it more eloquently, I would appreciate that. People I talk to about this don't understand my angle because I'm not good at making things clear, even though in my head I make perfect sense!



Superjane, I think you did a fine job, and I couldn't agree more. I am a Christian and I was married inside a Church. Now, I'm sure there are religions and beliefs that would say my marriage isn't "real" or valid. Fine, so be it. So long as the government doesn't get involved, I could care less.
ug333 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off