A different solution to gay marriage and civil unions

Started by Brandon, November 13, 2008, 05:51:17 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Brandon

This was just a thought I had earlier today while talking with a couple of friends. It would require a few changes to the way our country does things though. The first step would be to upgrade civil unions so that they had the same rights as what marriages today have. The second step would be to abolish marraige as a govermental practice and force all couples whether straight, gay, or bi to get civil unions. This would keep marriage as strictly a religious union and each seperate religion could choose whether or not gay couples could get the same union or not.

The effects that I see from the idea follow
1. Allows any couple to have the same rights and privliges that married couples currently have
2. Keeps marraige as a strictly religous union, allowing religions to continue their beliefs on homosexuality
3. Allows the goverment to keep a better seperation between church and state

Thoughts?
Brandon: What makes him tick? - My on's and off's - My open games thread - My Away Thread
Limits: I do not, under any circumstances play out scenes involving M/M, non-con, or toilet play

Zakharra


mannik

So basically your just replacing the marriage license with a civil union license?

Brandon

Basicly yes. Marraige will have no legal standing and be kept as a religious ceremony. Its the civil union that has the legal authority and under the idea all couples would be forced to enter a civil union if they were to have the same rights and privliges that normal married couples have now
Brandon: What makes him tick? - My on's and off's - My open games thread - My Away Thread
Limits: I do not, under any circumstances play out scenes involving M/M, non-con, or toilet play

Inkidu

It will work in every state but Louisiana, that's because everyone else is Common Law and the latter is Napoleonic or Civil Law. By tradition Louisiana will have to make it ten times more complicated than is required. Oh silly Louisiana. It's called the Common Law approach. Though not every state recognizes common law marriage. It's better than nothing. :D
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

Moondazed

I think that's a wonderful idea, Brandon!  Sadly, I suspect it will take an act of Congress (or more) to force the religious machine to let go of their death grip on marriage.
~*~ Sexual Orientation: bi ~*~ BDSM Orientation: switch ~*~ Ons and Offs ~*~ Active Stories ~*~

Trieste

Someone told me when I left Canada that this system was already in the works up there. I have no idea if they actually went through with it or not, but around 2003, there was a movement in Canada to abolish marriage and replace it with civil unions in this manner. I personally loved the idea when I heard about it, but I do not forsee the US doing something like this within my lifetime.

Inkidu

Quote from: moondazed on November 13, 2008, 07:07:03 PM
I think that's a wonderful idea, Brandon!  Sadly, I suspect it will take an act of Congress (or more) to force the religious machine to let go of their death grip on marriage.
That would be a crossing of church and state, thus unconstitutional. So it's going to take an act higher than congress.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

Moondazed

~*~ Sexual Orientation: bi ~*~ BDSM Orientation: switch ~*~ Ons and Offs ~*~ Active Stories ~*~

Oniya

Quote from: moondazed on November 13, 2008, 10:41:18 PM
What would be a crossing of church and state?

Having Congress force a church to do anything.  Just as a church is not supposed to try to force Congress to do anything.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Moondazed

I don't understand how changing the term from marriage to civil union has anything to do with the church?
~*~ Sexual Orientation: bi ~*~ BDSM Orientation: switch ~*~ Ons and Offs ~*~ Active Stories ~*~

Inkidu

Quote from: moondazed on November 13, 2008, 10:44:37 PM
I don't understand how changing the term from marriage to civil union has anything to do with the church?
The way you phrased it. It made it sound like congress was going to tell the church what to do.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

Oniya

I think it was this phrase:

Quote from: moondazed on November 13, 2008, 07:07:03 PM
Sadly, I suspect it will take an act of Congress (or more) to force the religious machine to let go of their death grip on marriage.

But I do suspect that having completely different terms for the legal status and the religious status would take a lot of the fire out of the ultra-right's arguments. 
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Moondazed

Oh!  I was using that as a figure of speech :D  I'm sorry I wasn't clear about that.
~*~ Sexual Orientation: bi ~*~ BDSM Orientation: switch ~*~ Ons and Offs ~*~ Active Stories ~*~

RubySlippers

Quote from: Oniya on November 13, 2008, 10:42:41 PM
Having Congress force a church to do anything.  Just as a church is not supposed to try to force Congress to do anything.

Not always several churches my more Fundamentalist family members belong to are not tax exempt, they do so with their schools and charitable operations but no the church proper. So they can speak out in the pulpit against political parties or anything else they wish and be politically active.

I argue with the people that feel restrained by the laws just don't be tax exempt then the government can't make you do anything. Just pay fair taxes.

On this issue to get back to it it doesn't matter if you make all current "marriages" civil unions the Churches will not support it its still to them an attack on the traditional nuclear family. I brought this up with a relative that is in the American Family Association (down her in Florida a major religious evangelical group) and they oppose anything that would justify gay unions if that replaced traditional marriage. Plus in Florida it can't be done our Amendment 2 seems to ban those.

Its better to have something less for non-opposite sex couples and those that do not wish to be married but offers a reasonable number of basic rights that everyone can agree on. Then maybe you can get the conservative Christians and the others on board.

Tawni Black

I agree with this idea.

Then if the religious have a problem with being in the same category they can forgo the bonuses and have a marriage without the civil union. They would have the ability to choose that, where as now same sex couples cannot choose to have less, they are forced to.