how do you gay people feel about the gay marriage being called civil union?

Answer 1

This whole "different but equal" approach didn't work for how blacks and whites were treated in the 40's and 50's and 60's, and it isn't gonna work for gays and straights now.
Same is same. Call it the same.

Answer 2

A civil union grants the same legal rights as a marriage, Gays can't have either in most states. It is not, and never has been about the use of the term "marriage" it's about legal recognition of the relationship, and the rights that such recognition grant to the partners. Just for the record, historically, same sex marriage was the norm rather than the exception world wide, even among Christians, until it was banned by the Pope in the 10th century. It's not like it's something new.

Answer 3

It's two different things. Here in Sydney we have gay rights groups actively campaigning against gay marriage because they don't like the religious connotation. This despite the fact marriages performed in a registry office are not at all religious.
Then you have the case in South Africa, where gay rights groups are challenging the new civil partnerships bill on the grounds that it is unconstitutional for same sex partners to be denied the term marriage. They want to amend the marriage act.

Answer 4

I think if there has to be a differentiation between two different types of 'marriage', then the 'civil union' (or 'partnership' as it's called here in the UK) should include all non-church marriages, whether same-sex or heterosexual.
I don't know if it's the same everywhere, but here many straight people who are not religious choose to have a 'registry office' marriage, which is exactly the same legally but not performed in a church.
If churches choose not to perform same-sex weddings, then that is a different matter, but I think non-religious marriages should be called the same thing for everyone.

Answer 5

First and foremost, my partner and I want equal rights and recognition. We've been together 32 years. I'm all for long engagements, but this is ridiculous! :-)

Constitutionally, I don't think "seperate but equal" will fly in the US. Neither do the conservatives, which is why they're so antsy for a constitutional amendment.

Finally, the word "marriage" is not limited to religious rites. Any atheist couple can get married at the courthouse. It's also not about children. Any infertile couple or any couple that doesn't want kids can be legally married.

Anytime some religious nut claims "It's all about children", ask them how many illigitimate children they had before they decided to get married for the children's benefit.

Answer 6

Civil unions do not give gay people the legal rights a state sanctioned marriage gives to heterosexual. It does not give them full rights of citizenship.

Answer 7

I see it as a half step towards full marriage rights. It's not the same as full acceptance of marriage, but it's better than the past when our relationships were disregarded entirely.

And for anyone who thinks we'll be satisfied with civil unions, they're flat out wrong. Nothing short of full equal rights for gays is acceptable.

Answer 8

I'm gay. I have no problem with that; let the religions keep the word marriage. As long as we get all the legal rights and benefits.

Answer 9

How do I feel about it?
The same way blacks felt about "colored only" drinking fountains.
Segregation is exactly what the proposal is.
Religion does not own the word Marriage.
Separating name of the union of two people by orientation is every bit as offensive as racial segregation was.

Answer 10

I thik that exchanging vows should be called a bond between two people in love.