The purpose for "civil unions" is to establish benefits for all people who live in a co-dependent relationship. It is not a bad idea, but associating it with homosexuality is a very poor idea.
The majority of people do not accept homosexuality as "normal" and likely never will.
Cohabitional benefits should be extended to all people who cohabit, the word "marriage" should be discarded.
"Gay marriage" activists aren't very bright or politically astute, it seems.
2006-06-07 08:23:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by Left the building 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
There's nothing to gain by such a stunt, so I would have to say no. However, a corn-holer having a straight senator backing them up could be all that they need.
In the end (no pun intended) the issue needs to be brought to the insurance companies because they are the ones that will have to provide spousal benefits. We need to make sure that gay marriage doesn't become the next insurance fraud ticket. Once these issues are ironed out, the fudge packers can get married.
2006-06-07 15:08:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
That sounds like a pretty good idea, actually. As long as I get the benefits. Not having to worry about the toilet seat being up, conning a man into helping with the housework, staying attractive, arguing over the remote, being dragged to auto shows, cleaning up after "Poker Night," coming across the stash of Playboys. That sounds like a little slice of heaven to me.
2006-06-07 15:17:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by sparky52881 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
no cause straight people ARENT gay, its not the same as marrying a woman you don't love, if you are gay it affects the way society sees you much more than if you marry a woman. if you're a straight guy who would marry a gay guy, you probably are gay
2006-06-07 15:06:51
·
answer #4
·
answered by Deftoned1979 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
im straight and im for the same sex marriage because its not my life i know not everyone is like me i think people need to wake up
2006-06-07 15:08:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Nick 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
im thinkin.....not so much. i think iwill deal with the troubles that i have already...vs creating a whole lot more for myself
2006-06-07 16:16:03
·
answer #6
·
answered by pencilnbrush 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am not and would not act gay because I actually have morals and class.
2006-06-07 15:12:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by greencaddyman 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Lol...thats a funny question.
2006-06-07 15:06:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by ac28 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
That is a really stupid question-oh, and NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO way!!!
2006-06-07 15:18:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by music_live2010 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
why would that be making a statement?
2006-06-07 17:38:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by skooterbug 2
·
0⤊
0⤋