I was in my car this afternoon for a short drive, and I happened to hear an exchange between conservative talk show host Mark Davis and a caller who professed to be a lesbian., concerning gay marriage.
The caller said that she was perfectly happy with the notion of “Civil Union” instead of Gay Marriage, so long as they were legally equivalent and conferred the same rights and benefits. She said she understood the problem some people had with the term “Marriage” being altered to mean something other than what it meant to couples who viewed the term to refer to a holy union between a man and a woman. She was perfectly willing to give up the term in order to gain the benefit
Mark Davis said that he thought that would be an excellent solution, and that he felt that most people who objected to “gay Marriage” objected for that very reason. He felt there would be no problem in getting such an agreement, because Christians don’t “hate” gays- they do understand that domestic partners of any gender deserve simple human rights equal to those of traditional marriage.
That’s close to what I've found with almost any of my christian T-party friends. It isn’t the equal rights that bothers them, it’s what they view as the “theft” of the SACRED term “marriage”. As I’ve said before, the state has no power to grant sanctity to any endeavor.
I would go so far as to say that The State ( and by that I mean one of the 50 political entities comprising the United States - in which the power to legislate corporations and unions is held ) Should henceforth issue ONLY certificates of Civil Union, and stipulate that for all Contractual and Statute uses of the term “marriage” in any legal documents or contracts, the word “Civil Union” would be substituted, in affect retroactively granting to all civil unions past and present the same legal standing as the previous term “marriage” granted. This would apply across the board to any public or private contracts that provided benefits for “marriage”.
The state would then abandon the term “marriage “ altogether, and declare any previous legal definitions null and void. "marriage" would revert to a spiritual term ( not gonna quibble with those who know that it was originally a civil term stolen by the Roman Church) that could be applied by any spiritual or philosophical communities as they saw fit to “sanctify” any union of plants animals lawn furniture or gender that was in accordance with their religious beliefs in accordance with the 1st amendment respecting the establishment of religion.
The Supreme court could then apply the 14th amendment and reciprocity laws as it saw fit to bring about an America where all domestic partner relationships – man woman/man-man/ woman -woman were nationally on the same legal footing.
I certainly wouldn’t have a problem with that, and I think, according to both Mark Davis and my own informal polling, neither would most conservatives. The fight is in fact about the meaning of the term “marriage”, not the benefits. So, for giving up the State sanctioning of “marriage" by replacing it with the term “Civil Union” all couples in the state acquire an equal standing before the law, and the term “marriage” is STILL available to any couples who want it by a simple ceremony at the philosophical/spiritual organization of their choice, More than a win for gays, Right?
So, I come to you and I’ve got my backing all lined up, we’re ready to do the deal –
How do you vote?