If you heard someone say . . . (beliefs, homosexuality, America, churches)

[pdoel]

If you heard someone discussing their job, and they made a comment that there's a guy at work who does the exact same job, has the exact same experience, been there the same amount of time, but the person speaking feels they deserve more money than the other guy simply because the other guy is black, what would you think?

Would you think the guy speaking was racist? Would you have the opinion that this guy thinks he's better than the other guy, because he's white, and the other is black? Would you be shocked that someone would actually think that way?

I would assume most people would think the above. So now, here's another question.

If you heard someone say that they don't mind if gays have civil unions, but that they don't want it called marriage, what would you think? Would you think that the person who stated that, might have a feeling that gay marriages are somehow inferior to a heterosexual marriage?

We've all heard this debate many, many times, and I have to admit, that I get that feeling. Even if the government decides at some point to go the Civil Union route, do people really think that a gay couple is going to call themselves "Civil Unioned?" No, they're going to say they are married. I realize many feel it has a better chance of coming to be if we call it something different. But I can't help but think those who will be ok with it, as long as it's not called marriage, have some kind of an "I'm better than you" attitude towards it.

[James the Persian]

Personally, I wouldn't say that my kids were married if they just had a legal state ceremony because, for me, marriage is a sacrament of the Church. So for me it's not about the nature of the union (hetero/homosexual) so much as whether it is a religious or legal union that is important. I guess that's likely to be an unusual view, but never mind. I'd almost certainly use the word marriage publicly so as not to cause offence in any case (and I certainly don't object to legally but not religiously married people doing the same) but privately I would not consider them married.

James

[michel]

Originally Posted by pdoel

If you heard someone discussing their job, and they made a comment that there's a guy at work who does the exact same job, has the exact same experience, been there the same amount of time, but the person speaking feels they deserve more money than the other guy simply because the other guy is black, what would you think?

Would you think the guy speaking was racist? Would you have the opinion that this guy thinks he's better than the other guy, because he's white, and the other is black? Would you be shocked that someone would actually think that way?

I would assume most people would think the above. So now, here's another question.

If you heard someone say that they don't mind if gays have civil unions, but that they don't want it called marriage, what would you think? Would you think that the person who stated that, might have a feeling that gay marriages are somehow inferior to a heterosexual marriage?

We've all heard this debate many, many times, and I have to admit, that I get that feeling. Even if the government decides at some point to go the Civil Union route, do people really think that a gay couple is going to call themselves "Civil Unioned?" No, they're going to say they are married. I realize many feel it has a better chance of coming to be if we call it something different. But I can't help but think those who will be ok with it, as long as it's not called marriage, have some kind of an "I'm better than you" attitude towards it.

If you heard someone discussing their job, and they made a comment that there's a guy at work who does the exact same job, has the exact same experience, been there the same amount of time, but the person speaking feels they deserve more money than the other guy simply because the other guy is black,

I know why you are using this scenario, but, to be honest, a racist would'nt mention it, because he knows he'd be seen as a racist.

But I know what you are gunning for, and I agree.

Even if the government decides at some point to go the Civil Union route, do people really think that a gay couple is going to call themselves "Civil Unioned?" No, they're going to say they are married. I realize many feel it has a better chance of coming to be if we call it something different. But I can't help but think those who will be ok with it, as long as it's not called marriage, have some kind of an "I'm better than you" attitude towards it

I don't doubt that you're right as far as America is concerned; but you would not be right about the European Continent (not all the countries, but most of them).

When I last visited Belgium (a couple of years ago), I saw my sister and her husband (she will now be 62, and he -I think- seventy. They seemed to accept it as 'normality' that there are 'unions' (and I think I remember then calling those 'marriages') between homosexuals.

I mention their age, because I think it pertinent (An older generation, in whose young day homosexuality was illegal). but they accept it as much as they do heterosexuality. maybe they don't understand it, but that is a different point.

As far as I am concerned, homosexual couples who have a marriage certificate will be 'married', but I guess there will be disenters.

Originally Posted by JamesThePersian

Personally, I wouldn't say that my kids were married if they just had a legal state ceremony because, for me, marriage is a sacrament of the Church. So for me it's not about the nature of the union (hetero/homosexual) so much as whether it is a religious or legal union that is important. I guess that's likely to be an unusual view, but never mind. I'd almost certainly use the word marriage publicly so as not to cause offence in any case (and I certainly don't object to legally but not religiously married people doing the same) but privately I would not consider them married.

James

As I said, there will be disenters. Just out of interest though, James, if it was not for Religion (if it is possible to understand marriage out of that context), would you still feel that there is a 'difference' ?

[Melody]

Originally Posted by pdoel

If you heard someone say that they don't mind if gays have civil unions, but that they don't want it called marriage, what would you think? Would you think that the person who stated that, might have a feeling that gay marriages are somehow inferior to a heterosexual marriage?

I think they're splitting hairs. If they can accept the idea that gays can have a "union", then what difference does it make what they call it.

My husband and I were married at city hall because he's an agnostic and won't take vows he doesn't believe in. I don't considered this 'civil union' any less a marriage since I did get married before God. God does not just abide in a special building but knows what is in our hearts.

[Green Gaia]

Originally Posted by pdoel

If you heard someone say that they don't mind if gays have civil unions, but that they don't want it called marriage, what would you think? Would you think that the person who stated that, might have a feeling that gay marriages are somehow inferior to a heterosexual marriage?

Unless they tell me otherwise, I would think that they are trying their best to reconcile their religious beliefs with how they view all people should be treated in a fair and free society. I don't envy those who feel they must choose between what they are taught to believe by their religious organizations and how they believe should be treated by the government. I've talked to too many people who really struggle with this for me to jump on the bandwagon of calling them bigots or assume that they view my relationship as less important than theirs.

[retrorich]

(1) I think that any two consenting adults--regardless of their gender--should have the right to be joined together in a partnership that provides ALL of the legal rights afforded to any other "married" couple. And they should have the right to call themselves "married."

(2) Some people may not wish to call same-sex unions marriages. So what? They can call them "stuffed cabbages," if they want too--but they must be made to accept the legal status of such unions.

(2) I think that churches should have the right to perform only those "marriages" they approve of.

[Green Gaia]

Originally Posted by pdoel

But I can't help but think those who will be ok with it, as long as it's not called marriage, have some kind of an "I'm better than you" attitude towards it.

And so what if they do, Pete. I understand completely what you're saying, but I am not interested in what other people may think about my relationship. Those who feel the way you've described are going to feel that way no matter what it's called. Guess what, I don't care! If I have a that piece of paper that says that I and my partner are legally obligated to each other and that the government and any other entity that recognizes marriage must treat us the same as a heterosexual couple - then you know what? I will be thrilled regardless of what it's called. Think about it, there are gay and lesbian couples married right now! No, they don't have recognition from the government or legal protections as a couple. But they stood before their families, friends, religious communities, etc., and proclaimed their love and commitment to each other. Now, to me they are already married! Of course others do not view this as a marriage, or as an inferior marriage. Does it take anything away from that couple that other think that way? No, it doesn't.

I would however strongly advise against another separate but equal policy, but we've already been through that topic.

[pdoel]

I agree with what you are saying Maize. I couldn't care less what people think of my relationship.

I think where I do start to care, however, is when they take that prejudice with them to the polls and vote to not allow me to marry. That's where I'm concerned.

Can you imagine having a ballet on a poll where you could vote to make the salaries of African Americans less than those of whites? Or anything along those lines?

That would be horrible, and I can't imagine such a thing. However, it's basically the same thing as allowing the population to vote to take our rights away.

[Green Gaia]

Well, this should never be a ballot issue in the first place. This whole movement to ban gay marriage, civil unions and even simple contracts when two