happythoughts 0 #1 March 4, 2006 "A rose by any other name..." If a civil union has all the legal rights/priviledges of a marriage, what is the difference ? Marriage has always been a social institution with legal definitions attached. However, most of the rights and limitations have been stripped away and occur outside of marriage. Child support can be assessed for non-married people. "Palimony" suits provide alimony for long-term but non-married couples. Most companies are providing benefits to same-sex couples with no long-term committment now, with no legal definition other than a signature. (Unfortunately, this is not available to non-married hetero couples in short-term relationships.) Legal authority in a medical situation can be designated without marriage or civil union. Essentially, there has been a legal end-run that has gutted any legal definitions to marriage anymore. What remain are covered in civil unions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #2 March 4, 2006 Because, as we discovered in Brown v. Board of Education, separate but equal isn't equal. Giving it a different name allows companies to discriminate and offer benefits for marriage and not civil unions if they want to. It allows people to say "this is ok for marriages but not civil unions" or vice versa. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfzombie13 324 #3 March 4, 2006 i am strongly opposed to any type of discrimination against anyone in this country(actually anywhere), so i say gay marriage should be a no brainer. i have several gay friends, and they should be allowed all the same advantages as straight married people. period._________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #4 March 4, 2006 I wasn't really thinking about gay rights or any of that. I was just wondering if we haven't hit a point where the overlap has become identical in legal function. Disney and Verizon already offer "married-like" benefits to same-sex couples (that have no civil union) and they don't offer them to non-married hetero couples. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfzombie13 324 #5 March 4, 2006 i totally misinterpreted your meaning. upon reflection, i suppoe that the policies to which you're referring are due to the fact that gays don't have the option of a legal marriage or civil union._________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
