Replies

Who cares? If people want to get married, let them get married. Actually the whole civil union thing makes more sense because marriage is a religioius contract and union is a secular one.

But, if homosexuals want to make a committment of some sort and stop being promiscuous why should anyone want to stop them.

Who really loses if we had civil unions?

Couldn't the GOP really bring in a lot of homosexuals under the tent if they just gave them a small carrot on this issue? The radicals will always be radicals, but homosexuals tend to earn more money than the average, be more educated and vote. Seems like a perfect constituency to stop antagonizing and bring on board.

The other small carrots we've given over the years have put us smack-dab into the current issue.

If you want to keep civilization intact, gay civil unions will just as easily destroy the core of our societies. There's no difference between gay marriage and civil unions except in the spiritual sense. The impact will be exactly the same.

Couldn't the GOP really bring in a lot of homosexuals under the tent if they just gave them a small carrot on this issue?

No. Leftists will always outdo conservatives in their efforts to remake civilization.

Second and most important, the GOP would stand to gain a few thousand votes, while losing millions who (like me) believe marriage to be one of the bedrocks of civilization.

"Seems like a perfect constituency to bring on board"??? Only if we want to continue with the destruction of traditional family, marriage, and morality. The GOP is unconservative enough. This "Big Tent" crap is nothing but crap. Why not get rid of the right to life plank and attract the feminist abortion lovers? Why not advocate socialism straight up and attract the communists and socialists? Might as well give up any pretense at a two party system.

Your comments only make sense if you see moral equivalency between normal marital relations between a husband and wife, and two men or women practicing sodomy together. You must be either seriously ill-informed about the pathology of homosexual behavior, or a moral relativist who thinks morality evolves as time passes.

Homosexuals have perfect liberty to remain monogamous any time they like.

"........and stop being promiscuous"

Yeah, what kind of drugs are you using?

It's all about the benefits and only about the benefits. Expect your health insurance to go up dramatically.

Who really loses if we had civil unions?

The people who say that recognizing same-sex unions will destroy society.

You see, many people here are dreading May 17, because same-sex marriages will be legal in the state of Massachusetts. They're upset by this because once it stops, there's no way to stop it until the 2006 vote to change the state constitution. As such, there will be two years where same-sex marriages are legal in at least one state. They fear that in the wake of these unions, absolutely nothing bad will happen. Divorce rates won't skyrocket, spousal abuse won't go up, children won't be abused and/or neglected, no court will rule that adult-child sexual relations are legal or that polygamous unions must be recognized. The seas won't boil, the sky won't fall, we won't have massive earthquakes, floods, famine, locusts or plagues. Life will go on as normal.

In other words, everything that they have predicted will fail to come to pass, and rational people will realise that the arguments against same-sex marriage never had any merit in the first place.

So you see, it's a matter of pride. We can't let same-sex marriage become legal, or all of the people opposing it will end up looking foolish.