Are we talking about recognizing deviant sexual relations? Or are we talking about defining right and duties of cohabiting persons whether or not there is any sexual involvement at all. As I understand it, civil unions spell out rights and duties which might pertain to a mother and her adult disabled son living together, three celibate nuns, an elderly woman and her longtime best friend/caregiver, etc, two men that sleep together, two men that don't.
Cohabitation agreements exist now, they are enforceable now. Cohabitation agreements do not care about love, do not care about methods of orgasm, do not even care about number of people. (Thanks to FReeper longtermmemory for this info).
Here is a freebie cohabitation form: http://www.ilrg.com/forms/cohab-agreement.html
There are even websites that will put it together for you: http://www.lawdepot.com/contracts/cohabitation-agreement/?ldcn=cohab
There might --- I don't know --- be some justification for civil unions due to deficiencies in cohabitation agreements that ALREADY exist. I don't know.
However my point is, that there are legitimate reasons to OK civil unions and/or cohabitation contracts, not for OK'ing perverse sexual liaisons, but just for regulating responsibilities and property between or among people who have formed or intend to form longterm households.
Rush Limbaugh supports this, as I recall.
El Rushbo is not the Pope, of course, but I think the Pope, too, supports civil unions which do not reference sodomy.
Which STILL doesn't make it specifically Catholic, one way or the other.
But it does make it, in terms of prudential choices, a matter of legitimate debate, without signifying that one is giving a respectful nod to arrangements predicated upon sodomy.
Excellent reply, t y 4 posting.
My two farthings: About 17 years ago, I was hired by a global corporation. During our orientation, we were told of our options regarding healthcare/life insurance policies, etc.
We could choose the option ‘significant other’ (man/woman/trans/beast/whatever) and it was as easy as printing a name & address.
Civil unions were accepted by the Feds long before the “Gay Marriage” abomination became Law. This begs the question: Why legalize the pseudo-’marriages’ of these misguided souls? What could possibly be gained by them? (Rhetorical question, you know the answer.)
Once again. outstanding post!