But marriage is a thousands-year-old institution with ancient layers of meaning--it is folly to think that you can, on a whim, force a wholesale change in it without paying a serious price.
Think of changing the metric system, or even trying to get rid of the worthless penny. And these infants think they can presto-changeo, what's in a piece of paper, no bid deal...
I agree. That is why I am against civil unions.
What I am trying to understand is why doing exactly what you say we should not do, but giving it another name, will avoid that price.
They have a sexual relationship. They have children. They are a family. They have common property. They have joint bank accounts. They are benificiaries on each others' life insurance properties. One gets benefits from the employer of the other. Each is a member of the others' extended family and they both visit together at holidays.
Aren't they married?
Shalom.