This thread is inspired by another: view original post
It's so God damn easy I don't get why no one thought of this yet. I posted this earlier a few months back but I think it was ignored. Before you start flaming me for my warped view of reality, at least read the whole thing
Give Civil Unions the same benefits as Marriage, and let Heterosexual couples be allowed to have Civil Unions. That would eliminate any "Separate but Equal" bullshit out of the water. But wait, there's more! Legalize Gay Marriage across the country, but let individual churches choose whether or not to accept the marriages. If Gay couples really wanted marriage they should have no problem finding a small local church to hold their wedding, and if they cant find a church to approve of it, there is always a Government equivalent with the same benefits.
Bam! Boom! Solved. Where's my medal?
-
13 Replies in this Sub-Threadif we just make Civil Partnerships the same as Marriages then we have the Separate but Equal problem (that it isn't equal). if we give everyone Civil Partnerships and make Marriages exclusive to religion (with everything the same except the names) then we again have the Separate but Equal problem, just applying to religion rather than sexual orientation.
-
I dunno if you understand. There is not going to be a gay marriage and a non gay marriage. Legally on on paper the government recognizes everyone the same way. When the same sex couple gets their LEGAL DOCUMENTS of Civil Union that they sign it will say "civil union" on document not marriage. Homosexuals are still allowed allowed to say they are married thanks to freedom of speech and all that and Christians don't have to preform the ceremonies.
-
i was paraphrasing, what they are literally called is irrelevant. the point is it is going to be named something different when gay people and straight people have the same ceremony. that is discrimination.
-
-