(March 19, 2012 at 11:09 am)Tiberius Wrote:(March 19, 2012 at 11:03 am)StatCrux Wrote: I would agree as long as a Church marriage had equal status to a civil union. Which is basically what we already have in the UK. Gay couples can have civil partnerships which give them all the same protection in law as married couples. They just want to rock the boat a bit more
We do not have it in the UK. Marriage is still defined in law as the union of one man and one woman. It is still discriminatory against gay people, polygamists, etc. This isn't about rocking the boat, it's about equality.
Summer's idea would work, but I still worry about having the definition of marriage controlled by the government. It doesn't solve the problem for polygamists, which I foresee as the next big push for equality. Far better to have the government get out of the marriage business altogether, and let individuals decide what it means. It would also save the country money, since we would have to get rid of all the bonuses we give people who get married (which is in itself discriminatory against people who have no interest in getting married).
That is the whole point, marriage IS the union of one man and one woman, anything else isn't marriage, this is why its an important issue, we are trying to REDEFINE marriage, same sex couples can have civil partnerships, but BY DEFINITION they cannot marry. This isn't simply semantics, its an attempt to take the concept of union of man and woman and diminish it by calling any union a marriage. To illustrate its like the government deciding to call anyone it deems a nice person to now be called a saint, so aany nice people can now be called a saint, it would diminish the concept of a saint in the same way calling any civil partnership a marriage diminishes the concept of marriage.