I agree with much of what TJBender has posted, and I think he kind of understands my point of view.

 

Consider this.  Why was the whole issue of gay marriage started in the first place?  It was because same-sex couples wanted the same legal benefits of traditional couples.  For example, they wanted to be able to file taxes as "married", wanted to have spouse survival benefits in the event of the death of their spouse, wanted to be able to purchase insurance as a family rather than individuals, etc.  I personally see nothing wrong with that and support it as most reasonable people do.

 

The problem is that there are many people who consider marriage as a religious union between a man and a woman.  All that I'm saying is that a reasonable solution to avoid problems such as this lady that is the subject of this thread, is to change the legal term to a civil union on legal documents.  After doing that, then anyone entering a civil union can call their union whatever they wish, and if they choose to call it a marriage they are certainly free to do so.

 

Here is another way to look at it.  The civil union is the legal binding contract between two people.  A marriage or wedding is the ceremony celebrating and recognizing that legal binding contract.

 

 

Quote:That kinda makes sense to me. Everyone is legally entering into a civil union. Getting married then would just be the act of having a wedding. I would be fine with that if the definitions were applied to all parties.

 

We might actually agree on something.  Time to test out the new bunker.  

---