Comments


  • There are plenty of things wrong with civil unions for glbt people!

    Heaven forbid but think about the last time if any in your family where your spouse got put in the hospital and you rush over to see him or her and all you have to say is "she's my wife" or "he's my husband" and you are immediately let in... Not with C-U. Think about every year when you file joint-tax returns and you are eligible to receive a tax break exclusive for married couples.... Not with C-U. Do you know that heterosexual couples get 1,049 benefits and protections, which were established by the General Accounting Office since 1997? If gay marriage was recognized on a federal level we could in fact have these benefits and protections just like everyone else. We need to get rid of The Federal Defense of Marriage Act which does two things. First it says that no state shall be required to recognize the laws of another state in regard to same-sex marriage. Second, it defines the word "marriage" in Federal Law explicitly as "a legal union of one man and one woman as husband and wife" and defines spouse as "a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."

    A Lawyer cannot even set most of this up for a glbt couple. It would cost thousands of dollars in legal fees, and if you have a marriage license which costs less than 100 dollars you can get the same benefits plus more. Anything set up by a lawyer can be challenged in court, especially wills. Legal spouses always have more legal power over any other relative. Marriages are recognized in every other state, not to mention in some cases universally.

    These are the differences between civil unions and marriages.

    Now not only does the term "civil union" sound very robotic and disconnected it's also not equality.

    Quite frankly I would love to see gay marriage recognized and approved on a FEDERAL LEVEL. The only reason someone would disprove of glbt marriage is because they are afraid of it having an effect on their own marriage or somehow belittle the meaning of it, this however is not true. Another person's marriage doesn't effect yours unless it's the actual person whom with which you are married to. People like to assume they are correct because they are seeing the word marriage and taking its meaning and twisting it around to say it originated from a religious book. I do not consider marriage to be a "religious" term at all. I see it as an English language term used to describe any intimate or close union between two consenting adults.

    Wake up people! This is what GLBT wants. EQUALITY. There is no such thing as separate but equal.

    May 3, 2009 at 8:58 p.m.

  • Freethinker & newearth

    Federal is the key word…The federal government should not define marriage.

    Let the states decide…4 states are accepting gay-marriage 46 to go.

    Again this the United States of America for Jews, Muslims, Christans, and non-Christians; so quoting scripture will not penetrate the tone deaf and in-your-face will turn off those in the middle supporting the upward trend of acceptance….IMO

    May 1, 2009 at 1:27 p.m.

  • Everything that feels good should be done, no unnatural thought or feeling should be depressed, change marriage to included gays, let the man or now woman have several spouses as many as they want,(polygamy should be a right too) and a couple of months ago in Canada the thought and feelings to harvest the body parts of a baby should not have to wait to the baby actually dies and put on life support, the parents and many others that would be stupid, the march on May 2nd and 9th to legalize illegal drugs super great, much easier to go to local store for daily fix, just think the fun that so many families will have, maybe once and for all the TAKS test scores might improve. There are so many feelings unheard of and yet to be born, but we as the people really need to keep fighting and force we the people to accept and embrace the great future that lies ahead, no matter if it makes them want to throw-up!

    May 1, 2009 at 9:22 a.m.

  • Civil unions are not exactly the same as marriage. I think the federal government should recognize marriage between same sex couples. Not civil unions but marriage. I don't think a particular church should have to peform same sex marriages though. That is unless they get any federal funding of any kind. Then they should either peform the marriages or pay taxes!

    May 1, 2009 at 8:39 a.m.

  • I agree Audrey, people like Mr. Tasin need to revise their strategy because it is not working…The trend of Americans accepting gay-marriage, is going up not down, so they need it to remain a state issue….Accept Civil Unions and declare victory…

    April 30, 2009 at 2:03 p.m.