Thread: Take Marriage Private
View Single Post
Old 12-03-2007, 09:08 AM   #7 (permalink)
hkbajwa
Council Member
 
hkbajwa's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Pakistan
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,179
Points: 5,047, Level: 45
Points: 5,047, Level: 45 Points: 5,047, Level: 45 Points: 5,047, Level: 45
Level up: 49%, 103 Points needed
Level up: 49% Level up: 49% Level up: 49%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
hkbajwa is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by fxashun View Post
Or we can rightfully conclude that the homosexual union is a different entity than the heterosexual one and just call it a "civil union" like most other countries that recognize it do.
Yeah i don't get why it's so damn important to officially assign the WORD "marriage" to this union.

All marriages ARE civil unions. Now if what you propose is that the civil unions of homosexuals affords THE EXACT SAME RIGHTS as "regular" marriages, then there would not be much to complain about.

However i'm guessing that gay rights activists are more concerned with civil rights than with what word will be used to describe the union. Of course their concern is fair, since not all states allow civil unions OR afford equal rights to homosexual relationships.

A homosexual union is only different in terms of the gender of the couple. That should not exclude them from the legal rights and obligations that ANY relationship brings with it.
Love for all, Hatred for none