marriage or union? since marriage is for a man and a woman, gay marriage have its own name. please read?

Question

I am not being mean. I am not gay but since so many people get mad because of the word marriage, is there a special word gay people could use instead of marriage. a word that would make it special to them?? just a thouight. no offence intended. please don't be mean. I am not gay, but people can do whatever they want to do . I just thought that the gay marriage could have it's own word instead of marriage to stop the problems.

Answer 1

I would not care what it was called as long as I had a legal means to 'join' with my partner. I am not interested in the religious aspect of a marriage. I am interested in gaining rights so that I may file joint taxes, have medical say, get my spouse on my insurance...that sort of thing. I believe we should have civil unions for 2 people who want to be considered a couple legally - and those people that also want a religious ceremony should have a regular wedding through their church.

Separation of CHURCH & STATE.

Answer 2

On the face of it, it's not at all a bad idea -- many do use an alternate term to marriage to designate a legal/religious partnering of two people of the same sex.

On the other hand, the issue boils up not only in terms of what is said -- personally, I don't care -- but what the words mean when said. Marriage comes with a bundle of meanings, including commitment to a more or less exclusive sexual relationship, the potential for childrearing and joint property rights and responsibility. All of these issues are contested socially and legally in the U.S. when the partners are of the same sex; witness the difficulty lesbian and gay couples have adopting a child. Much the same thing applies to something as simple as visitation rights when one's spouse is in the hospital or nursing home; since the relationship is not defined as marriage, the healthier partner can be denied visitation if blood family object.

The term union does not cover these issues in a consistent, positive manner as yet. The laws needed to make it do so are slow to be created, slow to be passed, and so many see the better, quicker solution to be a redefinition of marriage to include couples of the same sex. There are advantages to both sides of the arguement; I really have no idea what we'll see in another ten or twenty years, or if it can indeed be resolved in that time.

Answer 3

I am not gay either, but why worry about it? People should just worry about themselves and stop letting everyone elses business be thier main concern.

If you are secure in your personal belief system, lets say your church for instance- THAT is where the term marriage should be used, when you make the commitment to the wonders of the unknown universe, God, or whatever is your beliefs. But that is the place for beautiful weddings, and all. So if folks of whatever persuasion can find thier own special place, i hope they really do have a happy productive life and get along with the world just fine.

"Civil Union" is the only thing the government needs to be concerned with- just pay the fee and file the papers and let the next in line go to up to the window.

The government makes a really LOUSY church, doesn't it? Can you imagine the dull look and depressing way that kind of spitiual responsibilty would be delivered if the government is responsible for your spiritual happiness? ewww! lol!

Answer 4

I'm Gay.

First off - why do gays want marriage? Just because we want to annoy straight people? No. We want marriage because we want equal civil rights. We want survivors rights, help with adoption issues, visitation rights and power to decide for our partners when they are ill, survivors rights (someone could have lived with someone for 30 years in a house and upon their partners death find themselves evicted by the partners uncaring niece or nephew), tax rights, health insurance rights.... A gay couple can get these same rights drawn up on paper - but it costs about $18,000 than a simple marriage ceremony.

There already are civil unions in some states. A civil union is an arrangement/contract recognized by a State that is similar to a marriage. Initially I thought this was a great a great compromise. However, a civil union has considerably LESS rights than a marriage. Their are about 117 less rights in a civil union than a marriage. For example, a civil union is only good with in that State, they often don't include adoption rights, it does not entitle a person to federal tax benefits and I can go on and on...

Why should we settle for agreements that don't give us as much rights as a marriage?

How much do a lot of straight people really value marriage? It is a 50% divorce rate now, you always hear about adultery and what not going on. What makes these straight people so high and mighty? Their are gay people that have been monogamous for decades and who really love each other - why do their unions not matter?

No you are not being mean.

If society would have civil unions that would guarantee as many rights for gays as a full marriage then more of us would be willing to accept them. We understand that it can be a catharsis for straight people to accept us. But unless we are given equal treatment, we should not be expected to settle for civil unions that don't give us as many rights as gay marriage does.

This is why we want full marriage rights.

Answer 5

When people talk about gay marriage, they miss the point. This isn't about 'gay' marriage. It's about marriage. It's about family. It's about love. It isn't about religion. It's about civil marriage licenses.

Churches can and should have the right to say no to marriage for gays in their congregations, just as Catholics say no to divorce, but divorce is still a civil option.

Putting gay relationships in some other category — civil unions, domestic partnerships, whatever — may alleviate real human needs or make those opposed to 'gay marriage' feel more comfortable, but by their very euphemism, by their very separateness, they actually build a wall between gay people and their families.

From a secular and legal perspective, there is no rational reason to deny same-sex couples the legal benefits and protections of marriage. The legal benefits that same sex couple receive as a result of their marriage do not come from the church, they come from the government. If a government is going to extend legal protections to couples wishing to formalize their relationship, then it should extend those protections to all couples. To do otherwise is discrimination, plain and simple.

Answer 6

Separate but equal... look at history.

How about if we rename everybody's marriage license a civil union contract, and let the religious ceremony that occurs in churches be called marriage?

A marriage license is a legal contract recognized under law and by the government. It is not based on the religion, morality, or any other trait of recipients except that they not be a lesbian or gay couple. Two convicted child abusers can get the state's blessing (potentially to begin a family for personal abuse), but two loving homosexuals cannot. That's just wrong. Think about it.

Answer 7

The states that have allowed it call it a civil union. And most gay people would be happy if they could at least have that, but the states won't even allow them the equal rights under any name, and that is the problem. And the 'Defense Against Marriage Act' is even more of a problem, because it's the only unconstitutional federal law (and they actually teach you that in law school). That's the one that says other states don't have to recognize your civil union.

Answer 8

I agree with you in one way -- I think just calling it civil unions would have worked, but I am bothered for another reason.

Marriage is an issue of faith. Those churches that oppose gay marriages should not have to perform them. Those churches that support gay marriages should be able to perform them. The government should ONLY take care of civil unions, and those should be for any couple that is legally of age.

I have been seriously concerned about this for some time. Not because we particularly support gay marriage -- we've been together nearly 15 years, we don't need a piece of paper, we are quite happy thank you. -- Rather, I am concerned because the use of the government to enforce the views of one group of denominations (Christian and non-Christian) on another group of denominations (Christian and non-Christian) breaches the wall of separation and creates a de facto established faith.

I support freedom of religion. My ancestors fought in the Revolution. Seeing one of the core principles for which they fought destroyed, and a subset of faiths setup as protectors and controllers of the public morality AND as the de facto state religion, chills me to the bone. Seeing one of the basic freedoms guaranteed us frittered away, while the press only sees it as a struggle between secularism and religion which is PRECISELY WHAT IT IS NOT -- the entire debate is religious -- is not only chilling, it is appalling.

So I say, let each faith do what it believes.

Regards,

Reynolds Jones
Schenectady, NY
http://www.rebuff.org
[e-mail]

Answer 9

Who are getting mad because of the word marriage anyway? i'm so curious. Union on marriage is a word for uniting two human body. NOrmally between men and women but i don't think it should be different with gay. The concept is uniting, right? then marriage or union is right.

Answer 10

In one state gays and lesbians can marry. In two other we can have "Civil Unions". Here is where it gets ugly. Several churches now recognize gay "marriages". Does this country intend to interfer with thier right to prefrom marraiges as they see fit?

I am not against Civil unions, however I believe for those churches that wish to perform these they should be called marriage. Regaudless of the fact. They are those who feel we are abominations, and against thier bibles. No matter what you call it, they will not be happy nor will they allow it.

However times are changing. Sooner or later we will win the right to marry. If harms no one, especially the bible tumpers.