At the moment there are legal reasons aplenty to have a marriage license
and marriage. Now, if that were changed countrywide so that the license
application says "Marriage License/Civil Union License," and there were
no legal differences anywhere in this country between the two, then...
But we aren't there.
We have to start somewhere.
The government used to fund and install nativity scenes on the town
square but you guys "fixed" that so get busy.
They were moving in that direction with the civil unions but the gay
community would not accept that. Now they are reaping the fruits of
that labor.
I know of no federal law that REQUIRES local governments to license
marriage.
I am not sure that if they simply refuse to do any marriage, the court
has much of a leg to stand on. That may not be finally decided until
the SCOTUS rules ... or someone runs out of money to fight it.
The result could be profound but I don't think that is a bad thing.
Why does the government have the power to decide who can "marry" since
that is a religious act?
"Civil union" makes a lot more sense when you are talking about
rights, obligations and privileges granted by the civil authority.
That should be available to any 2 or more people who want to enter
that contract.
I agree that civil union, if it universally grants all the legal rights
and privileges of marriage, is fine.
I'm not a fan of nativity scenes on public properly, but I'm not
offended enough to try to do anything about it. I did help get a public
polling place out of an overly aggressive fundie church and into a
public school.
I wonder...
Threaded Mode
