Well the way I see it the government isn't doing anything in the matter of marriage. I'm seeing people wanting to change a 200+ year old tradition that is vitally important to a substantial majority of Americans.
Now this can be handled coercively leaving ill will and hard feelings that extend into the next century. Or there can be a compromise allowing win win for everybody and going a long way to mending hard feelings and achieving harmony where prejudice and bigotry now exists.
I favor the second option.
Yup. Lets find some way around the bigotry against the religious and the pro-traditional marriage group, prejudice against the one man one woman concept, and bigotry and prejudice against gay and lesbian people. That's what I've been saying all along. Glad you agree Jer.
Explain Cyclop. How is that sentence improper? Or are you sticking with the concept that it is more correct for one side to give up everything important to them and the other side get its way, and hard feelings on both sides continue forever?
Do they take a bone out of the head of left wing people that makes the concept of compromise implausible or impossible? This is just mystifying to me.
I actually don't need to compromise ehBeth as I am neither a bigot nor prejudiced against gays in any way. At least my gay friends, associates, and one relative tell me I'm not
The African American community largely objects mightily to pulling the race card to justify 'gay marriage' as they quite correctly recognize this as comparing apples and oranges. Forbidding multi racial marriages did discriminate. To correct that situation required no change of cultural tradition and no change of definition. All it required was non interference.
The current marriage laws do not discriminate in any way. They are equal and equitable for everybody. I won't even attempt to explain why this is so as I have done that several times already and nobody is listening anyway.
However, those who for whatever reason cannot or do not wish to marry a person of the opposite sex do not have the same benefits of marriage: right of inheritance, right of shared insurance, right of hospital visitation, etc. The compromise I offer is to correct that with a civil union that provide those benefits.
The only compromise I would ask of the gay community is that they agree to pick anothe word for it. Voila, everybody except the few all-or-nothing fanatics get what they want.
Now I have explained this a number of times. Those of you who do not wish to accept it as reasonable fine. To me it is win-win. Those of you who want one side to give in completely and cannot see any value in compromise will go right on with your own brand of prejudice and bigotry.
My original thesis to resolve this issue would be to have EVERYONE get a civil union that granted federal and state rights and recognition. Then, if you so choose, you then can get married by the church or religious ceremony of your choice.
This allows equal rights under the law and keep marriage a sacrament for those who believe that.
The purpose of this thread was to discover if compromise was possible from the left. Apparently it is by some, and not by others.
I can't understand why compromise is that difficult an idea. Why must some peoples beliefs be trampled so others can feel equal when there is an alternative that would satisfy everybodies needs.