zauriel56 wrote:Unfortunately.. civil union licenses do not grant the full legal privileges of marriage. And no matter what it was INTENDED for, marriage is a secular legal status that impacts on almost 2,000 legal issues that a couple may be faced with in the course of their shared lives.
As a Christian myself, I oppose the idea of the state giving out marriage licenses as marriage was originally intended as a religious institution blessed by whatever higher power you believed in way back in the day, whether it be God, Zoroaster, Allah, Buddha, Brahman, or whoever. IMO the government should issue civil union licenses to any couple who wants them, and if a couple (gay, straight, "living in sin", or celibate) wants their union blessed by their god take it to a church, synagogue, mosque, coven, or whatever that will bless it. This way homosexuals can have government recognition of their union without religious connotations if they don't want them, but can if they do.
What I got out of Zauriel's post (and perhaps I'm reading too much of my own opinion into this) is that s/he opposes state sponsored marriage at all. Marriage should be a religious thing and only that, and if the government wants to slap some tax / legal benefits on people who are in a relationship then it should be its own thing. Yes, it would require re-writing laws, but so do a lot of worthwhile things.