Should homosexuals have the right to have civil unions?

Question

This is part of a discussion I will be having on a radio program this afternoon.

Answer 1

Again, there's a difference between "Civil Unions" and Legal Marriage.

Civil Unions do not offer the same rights, privileges and protections of Legal Marriage.

We know from the Fourteenth amendment that "Separate But Equal is NEVER Equal."
We know that restricting same-sex couples from legal marriage is a violation of the "Full Faith and Credit" clause of the Constitution. (Article IV section I)
"Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect there of."

DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) is the number one violator of this article and needs to be repealed!

Answer 2

If that's all that's available, yes, however a truly progressive society would offer marriage and it's rights and responsibilities. For references see: Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Sweden and soon the entire EU.

As for Don's answer, He is of course wrong. Marriage was afforded to homosexuals as far back as Babylon and Phoenicia, as well as Greece and Rome. Those marriage were as sacred as heterosexual marriage. It was only the advent of Judaism and Christianity that led to the prohibition. If anything, gays are merely demanding what was once granted them.

Edit: Tool, with all due respect, homosexuality is not a preference, it is an inate quality one is born with.

Answer 3

Like most popular political arguements the sides in debate are not on equal footing. If one's arguements against homosexual marriage is religious dogma than the issue is taken out of context the moment it hits the political areana. The tax, insurance, and other legal benefits afforded to those whom are married is a government function, not religious. So, we have once side arguing religion and the other arguing policy. This is not two sides of the same arguement. Constitutionally, religion should stay out of policy making and each citizen is entitled to all facets offered by American life-regardless of race, sexual orientation, and beliefs-may they be political, spirtual, etc. etc. .

Sexual orientation is just a preference. That's all. To deny them anything any other citizen should have is like Coke drinkers exonerating rights for Pepsi drinkers.

This is not Fascist Islam. It is not a culture dictated by religious dogma. Imposing Jeudeo-Christian beliefs (which lack explicit statements in their sacred text anyway) on the whole is Fascist. It is un-American and unpatriotic.

The arguement is for you peers, churches, and philosphical circles-not national policy.

Answer 4

No they should not.And no I don't hate Homosexuals.I am beginning to believe they hate us.Marriage and Homosexuality has been around for thousands of years.Now all of a sudden they want to get married.It never seem to bother them before.I see it as a group of individuals who can't except the word no.They didn't except it when they chose to be as they are and now they don't want to except the word no on this issue as well.Its not even really about marriage.Its about the word "no" and they can't handle that.And now all of you give me the thumbs down, and then go out and demand your freedom of conduct.