Quote Originally Posted by MajMike
Civil Unions vs Gay Marriage - A Compromise

This is an issue which has gotten lots of press and attention from our lawmakers recently, one side sees it as a basic American right, the other as an attack on the institution of marriage. Is there middle ground? How do we address this problem and ensure all citizen's rights are equal under the Constitution? Do we really want to amend the Constitution to specify a non-right to a minority in this nation? And if we set this precedent . . . . what's next?

I think a huge part of the current problem is nomenclature, for example what is marriage? Is it a religious ceremony conducted in a church and blessed of God? Or is it the civil recognition of a union between two people? For many it is both, a church ceremony after obtaining a license from the local government to marry. Which of these are we talking about when we say gay marriage?

Let me now say this, I am a Christian, and believe homosexuality is a sin. I do not want my church to sanctify a union between two members of the same sex. However, if we truly believe in the separation of church and state, I feel we must allow civil unions for gay couples. To do otherwise is to deny them the right guaranteed by our founding principles, the right to the pursuit of happiness. Government recognition of civil unions for gay couples provides them the same legal status as a couple married in church, thereby ensuring their equal rights.

Marriage is a different subject, as I have said I do not want my church to sanctify gay marriage, and I do not want any church to be coerced into doing something against their beliefs. That said, IF a church feels comfortable in presiding over gay marriages then to not allow them to do so would be government interference in their religious freedom. Do we want to set that precedent?

I think the time has come for all peoples to do what we can to unite our nation rather than making laws to divide us. And anytime our leadership starts talking about a Constitutional amendment I get very nervous, sort of like a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs. The compromises I have set forth above allow churches who disapprove of gay marriage to not allow it, each church is allowed to worship and act as they see fit, as our Constitution intended. The government extends the rights offered to the majority of Americans to all, permitting civil unions for gay couples guaranteeing their right to the pursuit of happiness, something we all should hold dear.

We as Americans have so much work to do to bring our nation together, and so many issues which, to date, have no good answers. Herein is an answer to one problem. It requires some compromise from those who have strict beliefs, which includes myself, but it is a compromise whose time has come. Let us move on to address the other problems we have in our nation.

I would agree to something like this. I feel the same and I dont advocate it, at least not in my church. But if a church decides they want to perform the service,... then I guess that would be a compromise I would have to accept. Because like you said, if the church did do that, and the state came in and stopped them, then the state would be interfering with our religious rights.



(Yes. Bend over.) written by psteve

Any way I can see that some of the smaller minds have picked me to pick on since my opinion obviously goes against there own day to day lives. If you like it in the but, dude thats fine with me. Let that be known. But I will never agree that it is right or even morally ok for two people of the same gender to legally get married and then to unite under god as a married couple. That contradicts the point of marriage.