I've stayed out of this for the past couple of days, but I feel I need to add my voice to the "liberal" side of this argument. The reason to change the definition of marriage is that the status of "married" brings many civil rights to a couple. Different tax bracket, inheritance rights, hospital visitation rights, insurance, ect. And it is seen by a growing number to be discriminatory to allow or deny these rights to a couple based solely on the gender of the the individuals.
The trouble is the the term "marriage" also has religious meaning to many people.
So the solution is rather simple. Separate the religious ceremonies of "marriage" from the civil contract. In order to get all the rights of being a committed couple, they would just need to get a "civil union" document. This would be completely separate from any ceremony the couple may or may not have recognized by the religion of their choice.
Ok, that's my two cents. I'm going to go back to lurking in the background.
Ian
Confidentiality Notice: This message including any
attachments is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender and
delete any copies of this message.
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
