Gay marriage in America: Aren't civil unions enough?

Question

To have separate unions for gays, apart from marriage, is certainly not a violation of human rights. It doesn’t matter what they call it, of course, because they have the same rights. Marriage is a long-lasting tradition of our country. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. And why do they bother? Lots of gay people don’t even get married. Why is it such an issue? Gay people should just be thankful that they live in such a wonderful country.

Answer 1

You again! You are too easy.



I will now use your words to illustrate a similar point.



"To have blacks sit on the back of a bus, away from whites, is certainly not a violation of human rights. It doesn’t matter where they sit, of course, because they’re still on the same bus. And why do they bother? Lots of black people don’t even sit at the front of a bus. Why is it such an issue? Segregation is a long-lasting tradition of our country. Blacks have always been made to live separately. Black people should just be thankful that they live in such a wonderful country and stop whining!"



And suddenly, this argument seems ridiculous, hateful and outdated, am I right? Seems like something only a cruel racist bigot would say, or someone from the 19th century.



Edit: @Arewethereyet, Solly Wolly Doodle, Trish, Guyster, & Mrs. Nesbit: Hear, hear!

Answer 2

A lot of straight people don't even get married either and the only reason it is an issue is because of "religion". Marriage is a long-lasting tradition in a lot of countries, not just this one. "And why do they bother?", what kind of question is that. "They". Well "they" are human beings and deserve the same rights as everyone else. It such an issue because people like "you" have made it an issue, and why do "you" care what "they" are doing anyways. Sorry didn't see the guys above me answer, we said the same thing.

Answer 3

No Carlos, it's not enough for them, because the law holds marriage more binding than a civil union.



Here's a scenario that explains it. You have a lesbian couple that live together for 20 years under the whole "civil union" thing. One of them has a baby by a sperm donor and the other one adopts the child.



The woman who had the child dies, leaving in her will the child to the partner and her possessions to the child to be held in trust to the partner to care for the child until the kid is 21. Then here comes Aunt Rita from Kansas who says, no, I want the child, it's the natural grand-niece of my dear beloved niece who has passed away.



By law, this will be dragged into court. It matters not what the will says, Aunt Rita has rights too, because she is blood to the child and the lesbian partner is not. The adoption can be taken away, along with all the possessions in accordance with the will.



In a marriage, this would not even be an issue, Aunt Rita would be laughed out of court.



Get it?

Answer 4

My state supreme court has found that civil unions are illegal because they encourage what amounts to a portion of the population being "separate but equal" and determined that to not offer everyone the right of marriage discriminates. There is a difference between religious marriage and legal marriage and religion likes to confuse the two to their own purposes.



If marriage was the sole right of the church, it would be compulsory for all marriages to be performed there. Churches in this state will not marry gay couples and that is their right and no one has any beef with that, but JPs will marry anyone who wishes it. It's nice to live in a state that views everyone as an equal under the law.

Answer 5

It's obvious you know nothing about the issue. Civil unions are NOT enough as they are NOT the same. Lots of gay people don't get married?? Try that gay people CANNOT get married.



We should be thankful for living here?? That sounds like a throwback to the 1950's.

Answer 6

Marriage grants many rights and responsibilities upon a couple that aren't granted with any other single legal contract. Those who believe civil unions grant the same rights as marriage are misinformed. Civil unions aren't federally recognized, meaning that couples that enter into one are denied 1,138 rights granted, by the federal government, with marriage. Here's a list of these rights:

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf



This lack of federal recognition also means that civil unions aren't subject to the Full Faith and credit Clause of the Constitution (Article IV, Section 1), meaning that civil unions aren't recognized outside of the state in which they occurred. Here's a link to a transcript of the Constitution:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

Answer 7

The Civil Unions laws could EASILY be reworded AND SHOULD BE to give the same rights as marriage without insulting the people that believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. The problem is that the Homosexual community at large apparently just wants to make themselves feel better by having a "more acceptable" title for their union. Its similar to the other politically correct titles that people want to be attached to their variations.

Answer 8

"Lots of gay people don’t even get married." Lots of straight people don't get married either, does that mean our right to marry should be stolen from us? No, anyone should be able to marry whomver they love.



Love SHOULD NOT have boundaries like race, gender, religion, or nationality, or anything else. I believe the most meaningful part of life is finding your soulmate and being happy with them, and nothing should get in the way of that goal.



I want to get married some day, and not because of religion (I am agnostic) or legalities, but because of the spiritual union, of forever being bound to my soul mate, my true love. (Although I am agnostic, I still have varied spiritual beliefs and views, I don't need a particular religion to define my spirituality) Think of things this way,. what if the world was almost all gay, and straight people were the minority, and you loved a woman deeply and wanted to marry her, but because it was deemed "unconventional" by a religion, how would you feel if that got between you and your true love? It's sick, and it's wrong to do that to someone, really sick.

Answer 9

calling it something else is discrimination against gays implying that they are no good enough for marriage. Everyone has the same rights, even if someone is gay.



So you're saying that if you wanted to marry a black woman/man I'd have to call it a mixed union legally.



So if a man-whore and a whore wanted to get married we'd call it a whorish union. Because whores go against God too ya know.



OK.



Jerk

Answer 10

While civil unions grant same-sex couples the same protections as married couples under state law, they deny same-sex couples the 1,049 protections granted to married couples under federal law. These include Social Security survivor benefits, the ability the sponsor a partner for immigration and the ability to take federal leave (and state leave in all states, excluding California) to care for a sick partner.



Furthermore, civil unions aren’t portable, meaning that states can refuse to recognize a civil union from another state. Unfortunately, civil unions are only performed in Vermont and, to date, no other state has recognized a civil union performed there. Married couples have the privilege of having their union recognized in all 50 states.



By the way I do not think the majority of the world see America as a 'wonderful' country...it's probably the most hated country on the planet.



What kind of 'wonderful' country gets to decide who can't marry the person they love, just because that person is of the same gender? Ridiculous.

Answer 11

Nope. They don't cover the same rights and they aren't the same, socially.



Marriage has not always been between a man and a woman. It was originally between a man and several women whose property he owned for life. Depending on the culture (Pictish, English and French at one point, Roman before it was outlawed as a political move before the empire fell,) gay marriage was perfectly legal. Then the ideal marriage was changed to be one older man and a thirteen-year-old girl whose property he owned and who could not divorce him.



Even in the US, marriage frequently took place between people in their early teens. So if we used "traditional American marriage," we'd be marrying off sixteen-year-olds right and left. Then marriage shifted to be more voluntary on part of the female and with established ages of marriageability. Then she got to be able to keep her property. Then she got to be able to divorce him.



Gay people don't get married because we can't. Marriage has always been something defined by culture that the people in it have to improve. So we're improving it. It will be okay. :D

Answer 12

This goes back to the whole "separate but equal" thing. Only with sexual preference instead of race. It's not the same. They can't do the same things that straight people can, even if they wanted to. Civil unions aren't enough. Either we all get the same rights or none of us get it.

Answer 13

No, civil unions and marriages are not equivalent.



Marriage has not always been between a man and a woman. Emperor Nero was famously married to a young man.



Some Native American tribes support gay marriages. Prop H8 is a clear abbrogation of their 1st ammendment rights.

Answer 14

I don't think the government should be in the marriage business at all. It should be civil unions for everyone. Marriage should be strictly religious and carry no legal significance.

Answer 15

It is a violation of human rights that gays are discriminated against and not treated equally as straight people based solely on their sexual orientation.



You say "Why do they bother? Lots of gay people don't even get married"



THATS BECAUSE IT'S NOT ALLOWED!



It's even more of an issue now because it was legal in California then it was reversed. You don't see that as a violation of human rights?



What if your state reversed marriage for straight people? I bet you'd be up in arms and protesting as much as us gay people.

Answer 16

That's not true (your claim that marriage has always been between a man and a woman). At one time marriage could be between a man and two women (but not anymore). At one time, blacks couldn't marry outside their race. If you can't handle change, just stay home and be quiet.



If you don't want to have a gay marriage, don't have one. We won't force you. Just don't prohibit ours. I don't even know what I mean by "we"... I'm straight actually.

Answer 17

Wonderful?

America is the land of the free yet England and Canada legalized gay marriage FIRST.



See a problem here?



Separate but equal DOES NOT work.

Answer 18

You are mistaken.



Civil unions are not recognize by law as being equivalent in rights. There are some companies and their respective insurance companies that still may legally withold health insurance benefits to partners in civil unions, whereas they cannot withold those benefits to spouses.

Answer 19

I live in Canada, what can I say. I know many gay people who are not interested in marriage, its too hetersexual.

Answer 20

marriage used to be for same-sex couples until the roman emporers Constans and Constantius banned it in 342 AD to be closer to christianity

Answer 21

think back to what happened to the blacks. they were slaves and then they were all free but the pain didn't stop there. they couldn't go to the same schools as whites, sit anywhere they wanted on the bus, couldn't own their own land, hell they couldn't even drink from the same water fountains as whites.



so in your logic they should have been happy they were free right?

Answer 22

Are civil unions enough for you? Why do you think gay people want anything less than you?



And as for seperate-but-equal - that was tried before, when there were "black" and "white" schools. It was a lousy idea then, and it's a lousy idea now.

Answer 23

Civil unions do not encompass the same rights as legal marriages.

Answer 24

civil unions do not give them the same rights. Look it up. It varies from state to state. It doesn't carry over from one state to another. Some states don't even have it. You are not comparing apples to apples.

Answer 25

Isobel wins.



I was going to bring up the "separate but equal" issue, but I was beaten to it. I doff my cap to thee.

Answer 26

Separate but equal is inherently unequal.



.

Answer 27

Gays (men or women) are NOT forbidden from getting married. Just not to each other. That is why it will require a new definition for "marriage." The one we have is a man and a woman ONLY.



Those on the Left (Democrats mostly) seek a total destruction of our society, so they can rebuild it in the image of the Marx utopia.



This is just one more step closer to societal destruction.

Answer 28

Yes. Blacks should have been happy with separate but equal, as well.