[–] 1 point 8 months ago

No, I'm trying to get your family recognized nationwide by using a different term to remove the barrier to rights and privileges. I'm separating church and state. I'm suggesting the freedom to get "married" by whatever religion accepts people for who they are. I'm saying the government should recognize when two people decide to contribute to society as one.

You can do both is my point. Get a certificate of union from the government (establish rights) and then go get married by whomever you want. Again problem solved.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    @Noxy. Question. Would you rather be "married", with no rights or privileges, to your spouse or be in a "union" with your spouse with rights and privileges?

    I hate to say it but religious people claim the word marriage. You can fight all you want but it won't change the outcome.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    I think you missed the main term in my response. Union. A union is a recognized formation of parts that work together for a common interest or purpose.

    A "union" could be designated to have all rights and privileges that you lay out as only reserved for marriage. But a union could also go further. It could go into any level of granularity that the people of the union specify that might be ambiguous with typical "marriage rights". If marriage defines everything then what's the point of a prenup? Also, ALL of your examples can be superseded by other legal agreements, contracts, wills, etc. For example, a signed power of attorney takes priority of hospital decisions.

    I'm making quite the opposite point on same-sex marriage.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›