Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Unlike the other thread, I won't copy-n-paste some propaganda from a source with a biased agenda, I will post my own original thoughts on the subject.
It is only in the past several years, we have been introduced to the term "gay marriage." Probably because the very idea is contradictory of logic and the term is an oxymoron. In previous eras, you would probably be laughed out of the room for suggesting such an idea, it is beyond rational or intellectually reasonable. It persists today because it has been raised up the liberal banner with civil rights, and we're inundated with the term 24/7 from activists who get their rocks off changing tradition.
Marriage has been around a long time, and has taken on many forms in other cultures. In some, marriage is not about love or emotional attractions, it is an arrangement, often made by ones family. Even in some cultures today, it is not about love and compatibility as much as it is about class or religion, people marry within their own faith, within their own social class... there is no law against interpersonal discrimination, we all have it to some degree. But one thing marriage has never been, is union of same gender. This defies the very spirit and nature of marriage, as same genders do not need to be joined together, they are already the same.
From a purely intellectual standpoint, we must admit, marriage is what marriage is, and we can't alter the meaning of marriage to fit our personal whims. To change marriage from what it is traditionally understood to be, is to destroy what it is. I could just as easily establish marriage is a religious institution and shouldn't be subject to any legislative considerations for any reason. If I can change what marriage is, then I can formulate all sorts of arguments and call them legitimate, and that is what pro-gay-marriage advocates have done. Marriage, when talking about humans, has always been the union of male and female genders, it has nothing to do with love, sex, lifestyle, religion, companionship or compatibility. It is the union of two things, a male gender human and a female gender human. That IS what Marriage IS, and we must begin any rational conversation from this perspective.
So what does all of this have to do with a Liberal Case for Civil Unions? It's a real shame I have to preface my commentary with two paragraphs of pretext, so we can understand the perspective of rational thought, but that is where we have come to these days. The Liberals and Gay Rights arguments for Gay Marriage, are always centered around bestowing some "rights" upon homosexuals, which others presently have, namely traditional married couples. These "perks" range from tax breaks, to insurance beneficiaries, and any number of other societal areas, where we give advantage to "married" couples. This is the compelling foundational reason for why we should support their idea, the basis for their claims of "rights" in the argument.
If the true nature of the problem is benefits, domestic partnership laws can remedy that. If it is a matter of love, nothing the government can ever do will change that. If it's a matter of acceptance, it can't be accomplished by force. Liberals should be pragmatic enough to understand, the longer this debate goes on, the longer gay couples have to do without the so-called "rights" or benefits from their partnerships. To continue fighting a hopeless battle, trying to "redefine marriage" which will never be successful, is not benefiting a single solitary gay couple in America! At some point, you have to wonder, why Liberals want to continue pushing for this, if they really want to help gay couples?
Civil Unions legislation is something I have often advocated. A comprehensive bill which would effectively replace "marriage licenses" with "civil union contracts" and would be available to any two consenting adults. Traditional marriage could continue as it presently does, couples would simply get a CUC instead of a "marriage license" and any two adults could obtain a partnership and function as a "couple" with regard to benefits, insurance, etc. It's the best of both worlds, solves all problems, gives all sides what they want. Furthermore, it would probably pass easily in most states.
And here is the best part, and why Liberals should make the case for it... The benefits start immediately! And not just for gay couples, but any two adults who wish to take advantage of a partnership. Think about it! No more bickering, no more fighting, no more hurling baseless allegations, no more bandying about the comparisons to civil rights, and hating on your fellow man! Most of all, no more arguing from a point of sheer stupidity about the word "marriage" and what it means! With this, it doesn't matter what it means, everyone is taken care of, everyone is happy, problem solved!
...Isn't solving the problem important to the Liberal???
It is only in the past several years, we have been introduced to the term "gay marriage." Probably because the very idea is contradictory of logic and the term is an oxymoron. In previous eras, you would probably be laughed out of the room for suggesting such an idea, it is beyond rational or intellectually reasonable. It persists today because it has been raised up the liberal banner with civil rights, and we're inundated with the term 24/7 from activists who get their rocks off changing tradition.
Marriage has been around a long time, and has taken on many forms in other cultures. In some, marriage is not about love or emotional attractions, it is an arrangement, often made by ones family. Even in some cultures today, it is not about love and compatibility as much as it is about class or religion, people marry within their own faith, within their own social class... there is no law against interpersonal discrimination, we all have it to some degree. But one thing marriage has never been, is union of same gender. This defies the very spirit and nature of marriage, as same genders do not need to be joined together, they are already the same.
From a purely intellectual standpoint, we must admit, marriage is what marriage is, and we can't alter the meaning of marriage to fit our personal whims. To change marriage from what it is traditionally understood to be, is to destroy what it is. I could just as easily establish marriage is a religious institution and shouldn't be subject to any legislative considerations for any reason. If I can change what marriage is, then I can formulate all sorts of arguments and call them legitimate, and that is what pro-gay-marriage advocates have done. Marriage, when talking about humans, has always been the union of male and female genders, it has nothing to do with love, sex, lifestyle, religion, companionship or compatibility. It is the union of two things, a male gender human and a female gender human. That IS what Marriage IS, and we must begin any rational conversation from this perspective.
So what does all of this have to do with a Liberal Case for Civil Unions? It's a real shame I have to preface my commentary with two paragraphs of pretext, so we can understand the perspective of rational thought, but that is where we have come to these days. The Liberals and Gay Rights arguments for Gay Marriage, are always centered around bestowing some "rights" upon homosexuals, which others presently have, namely traditional married couples. These "perks" range from tax breaks, to insurance beneficiaries, and any number of other societal areas, where we give advantage to "married" couples. This is the compelling foundational reason for why we should support their idea, the basis for their claims of "rights" in the argument.
If the true nature of the problem is benefits, domestic partnership laws can remedy that. If it is a matter of love, nothing the government can ever do will change that. If it's a matter of acceptance, it can't be accomplished by force. Liberals should be pragmatic enough to understand, the longer this debate goes on, the longer gay couples have to do without the so-called "rights" or benefits from their partnerships. To continue fighting a hopeless battle, trying to "redefine marriage" which will never be successful, is not benefiting a single solitary gay couple in America! At some point, you have to wonder, why Liberals want to continue pushing for this, if they really want to help gay couples?
Civil Unions legislation is something I have often advocated. A comprehensive bill which would effectively replace "marriage licenses" with "civil union contracts" and would be available to any two consenting adults. Traditional marriage could continue as it presently does, couples would simply get a CUC instead of a "marriage license" and any two adults could obtain a partnership and function as a "couple" with regard to benefits, insurance, etc. It's the best of both worlds, solves all problems, gives all sides what they want. Furthermore, it would probably pass easily in most states.
And here is the best part, and why Liberals should make the case for it... The benefits start immediately! And not just for gay couples, but any two adults who wish to take advantage of a partnership. Think about it! No more bickering, no more fighting, no more hurling baseless allegations, no more bandying about the comparisons to civil rights, and hating on your fellow man! Most of all, no more arguing from a point of sheer stupidity about the word "marriage" and what it means! With this, it doesn't matter what it means, everyone is taken care of, everyone is happy, problem solved!
...Isn't solving the problem important to the Liberal???
