Last Post EVER on Civil Unions....

[LeftHander]

Wisconsin and other states passed constitutional amendments to define marriage as between one man and one woman and will not recognize any "union" effectively similar to marriage for same sex couples.

That means that in those states a civil union is unconstitutional right off the bat.

There simply is no right to being recognized as a couple, caring for one another, living together, sharing expense and yes even raising children.

Here in Wisconsin a "family" is effectively legally defined as a single parent or a male and female couple with or without dependents.

There is only two ways around this:

1. Amend the state constitution and remove the language. (two legislative cycles and general referendum)
2. SCOTUS declares the state language as federally unconstitutional.


So PLEASE STOP TALKING ABOUT CIVIL UNIONS as a solution....IT IS POINTLESS!!

The only remedy is going to come from SCOTUS. (like that is going happen anytime soon with this court makeup)

0h....All the sudden those Bush SCOTUS appointments suddenly look REALLY SOUR...(((DUUUH!))))

Had we FILLIBUSTERED those appointments rather than playing political football with them we would of actually had a
court that would be reasonable enough to take up the issue.

We don't want gay marriage to go to this court of nine made up of 7 Republican Presidential appointees.

4 of which are the most conservative wackos to sit on the court in decades and they come from Bush stock.

[FreeState]

1. Anyone promoting Civil Unions over Marriage is missing the whole point IMO

Separate is never equal - when people say gays can get the same rights via civil unions no only are they wrong they are advocating for legal segregation of a group of people. This is un American. We all should be allowed the same rights and privileges under the same law.

Civil Unions for all is a fantasy that will never happen in America - besides the cost involved in re-writing the laws to reflect the language change the is no way the majority of Americans will ever give up marriage for Civil Unions. 48.5% of the voters voted for Gay Marriage - most people dont realize this but in CA if only 250K voters voted the other way marriage would still be available to all citizens in CA - there are 30 million people in the state - thats how close it is.

[gatorboy]

6. "Separate is never equal." Sums it up right there.

[elocs]

2. You have been around DU long enough to know you will not get far

trying to tell people what they may or may not talk about. It's just not a good idea.

The resolution to this issue will not be simple. I believe that the government should not be in the religious business and marriage is really a religious union. However it comes about I believe that the union between two people which the government should recognize as a union should be a civil union. Leave marriage to religion.

As far as crying over spilled milk as far as SC justices go, how far back do you go. Where do you start and stop in the what if scenario? Again, this issue is not going to be solved nationwide anytime soon.

[Pithlet]

5. So, are those of us who didn't have a religious ceremony not really married?

I went to the courthouse and got married with a justice of the peace. I have a marriage license the same as anyone who got married in the church. Do you really believe it shouldn't have happened that way?

This is why I've been getting so heated in these discussions. Every single time I see someone express the opinion "I believe government should get out of the marriage business because marriage is really a religious union", it is a slap in my face. It is basically saying that I'm really not married like people who got married in a church are married. I've been seeing it over and over lately in threads on DU. It's been so hurtful. I AM married. I'm just as married as anyone else. And that shouldn't change. Marriage is NOT just a religious union, damn it. It's not. It's merely your opinion that it is only a religious union.

[LeftHander]

9. I never said you were or wern't.....

Civil Union is simple pointless in the context of same sex couples because the rights afforded by either have already been denied.

What is your point?

[Pithlet]

12. I was responding to someone else.

I hate the idea of civil unions.

[elocs]

13. I think I indicated pretty clearly that what I wrote was my opinion.

I am sorry that was unclear to anyone. People are entitled to their own opinions, are they not? You are welcome to yours and here at DU, especially being among Democrats, I should be allowed to express mine also. Simple concept.

[Pithlet]

17. Of course you're entitled to your opinion. But, if you're going to express it

I think people are also entitled to ask you to expound upon it. But, you don't have to. As long as we're clear on it then. That is indeed your opinion. I'm not supposed to be married. The state never should have actually married me, because they're not supposed to be in that business. So, it's merely a technicality that I'm married, but I'm not REALLY married, not in the way that counts. Because I'm not religious. Okay. So, that's your opinion. But, just so you know. Just so I'll clearly express my opinion now. That is extremely hurtful to me. So, maybe you might want to rethink that opinion that you're entitled to hold. Maybe you never realized that was an opinion that was hurtful to other people. I'm sure it will also be hurtful to anyone else who shouldn't actually be married to many religious people who also want to see other people excluded from marriage, like the GLBT community. That's why I think it's better to just include everyone, rather than "get the government out of the marriage business". But, hey, it's just your opinion.

[yardwork]

18. Exactly. You know that you are married. You know that marriage is a legal term.

Nobody is legally married in the United States unless they go down to that county courthouse and get that marriage certificate. What they do then is their business. They can have the justice of the peace marry them then and there, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. Or they can take that marriage certificate down to the little white church house on the corner and have the minister sanctify their marriage in a religious ceremony AND sign their marriage certificate, which is when the couple is actually legally married.

Marriage has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. Marriage is a legal contract. You can have that marriage sanctified in a religious ceremony if you like but that doesn't make it legal.

[ArrowMan]

21. I know what you mean Pithlet. Many of these haters are too immature to marry anyway.

[LeftHander]

7. You don't get it either....

The federal government cannot create legislation that allows for same sex unions or marriage because now it has become a "states rights" issue. That my friend is a rallying cry for conservatives. Even moderate conservatives.

Trust me most of the center will throw gay people under the bus for states rights. Thus we will not see legislation at the federal level until the constitutionality of gay marriage/union rights are resolved at the federal level.

So again...what is your point other than attacking me for telling what people can and cannot talk about...

The only people talking about civil unions simply don't understand the situation.

So it ends. We move on.

We know that ultimately the SCOTUS will resolve gay marriage. Either for or against and that will be it.

All the machinations about this right or that protection doesn't mean squat to me.

I cannot be married. I do not have access to the same benefits to care for my family as a heterosexual couple does.

I have a family. My partner, his niece and nephew, myself and my daughter.

I can provide insurance to my daughter but not my partners niece and nephew who live with us. All three I consider my dependants but I can't sign them up for any of my benefits.

But I can feed them, cloth them, drive them to school, meet with teachers, be there....but I cannot sign any papers.

IT IS ALL SO UNFAIR! I was almost denied entry into family court when my partner was awarded guardianship after the kids father died.

These are the issues that people don't think about. they just worry about this crazy "protect marriage" bullshit.

The facts are plain.

[elocs]

11. Here is what I get clearly: this will not be solved quickly, easily, or simply.

I think that is very, very clear.

[yardwork]

19. I disagree. This can be solved very quickly and easily.

[ieoeja]

8. No, "weddings" are really religious. A "marriage contract" is government. n/t

[NorCalDem]

10. wrong!

"marriage" is not a religious word. Please try again.

[ieoeja]

20. Isn't that what I said? n/t

[NorCalDem]

22. Yeah, my bad :)

:blush: (i just misinterpreted what you said)

[yardwork]

15. Marriage is not a religious matter in the United States. It is a legal contract.

You are welcome to go on a crusade to change all people's marriages to civil unions, but in the meantime I would like to have the same right to marry as everyone else.

[nichomachus]

3. I have a feeling the court will look very different long before this case gets there

Look for three appointments before next summer

[Ohio Joe]

4. Agreed, equality for all and nothing less - nt

[yardwork]

14. Gay civil unions are also now unconstitutional in Florida and Texas

and a bunch of other states.

In fact, most of the numerous states that have outlawed gay marriage in the past eight years also specifically outlaw civil unions "or anything approximating marriage."

[gollygee]

16. I wish this would be the last thread about civil unions

but I'm afraid we'll end up with a few dozen more, at least.

[Chan790]

23. I've come up with an equally-great reason to not compromise with Civil Unions.

That reason being that this is a fight that can be won outrightly and permanently. I think I can see the other end of the tunnel. Why compromise when you can have the whole pie?



Where would we be if we compromised on miscegenation laws when they tried to use these same recycled arguments for why a black man and a white woman could not get married? In 1961, when our President-elect was born...nearly 50% of the states had laws making the relationship between his parents a crime. Really. These laws were not struck down until 1964 in McLaughlin v. Florida.

Any lasting victory for civil rights over the objections of the RW fascist crowd is like an uppercut to the jaw...it shuts them up for 10 years or so.