"Separate but equal" doesn't work. We tried that.

Post #348,310 by Another Scott 9/29/11 12:14:14 PM Reply	"Separate but equal" doesn't work. We tried that. Civil Unions are "separate but equal" in a different dress. It won't work. Marriage rights need to be equal. If you think "marriage" hasn't evolved over time, you're misinformed - http://www2.hu-berli...e_in_western.html Cheers, Scott.
Post #348,314 by beepster 9/29/11 12:35:12 PM Reply	You are missing the point to..so let me be clear It is NOT separate but equal. It is working on the LEGAL side..having the LEGAL term "marriage" changed to the LEGAL term of "civil union". If you walk down the street and ask, "where do people get married?"...the response will be "in a church". Try it. Like it or not, its cultural and religious. And its not a US only phenomenon, though our current discussion is about US law. So the term "same sex marriage" has a built in error for the vast majority. Change the "Certificate of Marriage" to a legally defined "Certificate of Civil Union", grandfather all existing certificates to the new definition and voila, equal recognition and treatment under law, no separation whatsoever. Its a different approach, a softer approach, and EASILY turned into a civil rights discussion without all the religious baggage that drives the nutjob right so crazy. Plus, you just posted a wordier version of the wikipedia article crazy did talking about marriage in ancient rome (which collapsed, by the way, crazy...the catholics didn't kill them). Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #348,316 by Another Scott 9/29/11 12:42:39 PM Reply	Nice try. Lots of churches will happily perform gay marriages. Lots of people don't get married in churches. Lots of people are "married" without any ceremony at all (see: http://en.wikipedia....the_United_States ) You're tilting at windmills to think that the term "marriage" needs to be somehow redefined or that it can be done "easily" or that doing so will make everyone "equal". (Sorry if I reposted info in a crazy link.) Cheers, Scott.
Post #348,321 by beepster 9/29/11 5:18:20 PM Reply	Re: Nice try. Why dont you try what I asked before attempting to rationalize it away with Wikipedia articles about state programs designed to give equal protection under law to those living together in committed fashion for x years ( depending on the state) as those who have been granted the appropriate state license. Define "lots of", too, ideally as a percentage of all. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #348,348 by crazy 9/29/11 11:16:33 PM Reply	Why does it matter?
Post #348,340 by boxley 9/29/11 8:27:00 PM Reply	better yet, no need for a state marriage license at all get married at a church, fill in and notarize your civil union papers and file them. Would work for both hetro and others Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #348,345 by crazy 9/29/11 10:51:38 PM Reply	Agreed
Post #348,364 by beepster 9/30/11 8:50:45 AM 9/30/11 8:51:13 AM Reply	Argh After all this, you agree with him...when hes saying the exact same thing. I fucking give up. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are. Edited by beepster Sept. 30, 2011, 08:51:13 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #348,374 by crazy 9/30/11 10:10:14 AM Reply	No, I want it at the FEDERAL level I want the state power removed in the 1st place though. Don't pretend you understand. You didn't have enough info yet.
Post #348,380 by beepster 9/30/11 10:39:35 AM Reply	Go back and read, butthead is there ONE MENTION of which government level I was talking. No. Is there one mention of which government level box's legal "civil union" form was filed? No. He just said get rid of the state marriage license...which is directly implied..if you change everything legally to civil union, there is no marriage license anymore. Equal protection under law and a legal definition of civil union that applies to all. Local, state, federal level of this was not discussed. You agreed with him. You disagree with me. We're saying the same thing. Which basically affirms to me that you were using me and attacking me to further an anti-religious rant at my expense. Thanks for that. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #348,384 by crazy 9/30/11 10:49:51 AM Reply	The single word matters Obvious you feel that word is IMPORTANT. So do I. I can agree with all kinds of stuff you say. And disagree with a core point as well. That is a cornerstone of holding multiple ideas in your head, realizing some of them conflict, and working through the issues. Not typically the religious way of thought. All or nothing, ya know? sigh And if that launches into my rant, so be it. You invite it.
Post #348,386 by beepster 9/30/11 10:55:34 AM Reply	no, actually it doesn't. your assumptions about his post versus your assumptions about mine were different. You agreed with him and launched a religious tirade on me. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #348,393 by crazy 9/30/11 11:06:45 AM 9/30/11 11:46:07 AM Reply	Of course not - to you Because you want it. You currently THINK you own it. You ain't giving it up. Edited by crazy Sept. 30, 2011, 11:46:07 AM EDT Expand All History

Welcome to IWETHEY!