Silkroad Online Forums

Create a word for Homosexual marriage. This would would have all the rights of Marriage in all legal and state terminology. In a sense, Marriage would = this word. For example, we'll use civil union.

Right now, civil union = union of two people, living together, but it does not provide full coverage. Some documents which use marriage define it as a union between male and females. When this happens, people in civil unions aren't included. This can lead to horrible cases like loved ones not being able to visit their partners in the hospitals, or their loved one is not the beneficiary upon death like in the military.

Since the only argument really on the conservative side is that marriage is defined as a union between man and female, to be fair, we will keep it that way.

Marriage = union between male and female.
Civil Union = union between same sex couples.

To ensure all is fair, for all legal documents, laws, etc. Civil Unions will be able to be used in place of marriage. Ex) Insurance says that a married couple who has a spouse suddenly die will pay $500,000 to their remaining spouse. Married couple can now be replaced with civil union couple. Everything still holds, it's just wherever marriage defined as man and women is used in legal terms, civil unions will also work in that place.

So for all non-religious cases, civil union and marriage can be interchanged for all documents. They are two different things, but legally it works the same. This way, the conservatives can have their "sacred" marriage, and homosexual couples can have all the rights a human deserves.

What do you guys think?

PS if anyone else is a redditor and likes this, pls upvote this so it gets to the front page =P.
http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comm ... oth_sides/

Maybe instead of civil union, we could use butt buddies?

Edit: I figure I might get flamed for this so I should explain. There was a South Park episode with basically the same idea, except they called them butt buddies, rather than civil unions.

I am not so sure, this part:



will need more analysis and verification to proof that being homosexual is not abnormal. I am not being racist here by saying that but such evidence is required to justify that homosexual is just another race and they are entitled with the equal human rights.

If you need the community to accept, you have to proof it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_rights

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage

Just saying

ITT: Homosexuals are not humans.

This thread will not last long.

lols, but I am cool with open discussion.

dynamies, I'm not entirely aware of this site's policies towards bigotry or blatant and offensive ignorance, but I can assure you you will win no friends with that sort of discussion. If you harbour such opinions, keep them to yourself.

In the future, if you have a feeling what you are about to say even just might be offensive to another person/group of people, do not discuss it. Everyone wins, believe me.

lol what

That is offensive/ignorant/bigoted/etc.

Make sense now? Keep the discussion civil.

you know they're human right? last time I checked humans where a race soo...wtf?

Tell me, why would the whites discrimintate the black in first place?

It is because the lack of understanding and poor communication.

If you care to look outside, they are much more people than you can imagine who are strongly disapproving homosexuality and even consider it as a crime.

Now, I am suggesting a method to provide understanding and justification to show these extremist that they are wrong.

There is no way you can imply a policy straightaway like that, unless you want to cause a riot or conflict purposely.

If you yourself cannot face the reality when someone point it out, that’s it I am out of here.

Edit: And I am just simply telling you guys what some others may think. I apologize since I doesn't state it clear in my first post.

inb4 Doron once again...

Ok, I see what dynamies is trying to say now. It is obvious English is not your first language so your previous posts didn't come through clear. Gotcha. Yes, you are correct. There are far to many ignorant people on this planet.

Yep, I am still working on my language, English is not my best subject =/

Edit: Once again, sorry for misleading in my first post.

People trying to get into other people's business is so amusing ... oh wait, shit is old and beyond annoying.

fucking hipster bullshit

or simply people can just stop being a smart ass who wants to mess with other people's business

Well, that depends on what kind of a business it is. xD

Well. I'm fine with the "Civil unions for all". As long as the same legal "qual rights" term applies to all partnerships
but no more, no less.

If it's exactly like marriage why not just leave it at that? It's only putting a label on the gay community then.

I knew a lady who was polyamorous.

Civil union would work maybe in that situation where she wanted to be married to her "husband" and his - er, well, he's not gay - bi - whatever he was, in addition. The problem comes from "marriage" being perceived as both a religious and a legal union. I don't quite understand the hubbub about people wanting to be in a union, legal and binding, between several people. Ok, not quite polygamy, but close. I could never really understand what she wanted from those relationships.

All you need to do is acknowledge that humans are capable of loving multiple people in all ways - sexually, intelligently, morally. But that's a hard concept for even my mind to grasp.

Marriage: because the ritual of marriage did not stem from religion, therefore, they shouldn't have any say on this. They're not even being forced to perform the ceremony - the government does that. Is it because they won't produce any children of their own as a couple? Do we have a population crisis?

Marriage is marriage. Saying that it is a "civil union" instead simply means that people are not willing to accept their right to it as equal. There really is no need for it if the rights for heterosexual and homosexual couples are to be the same. In that case, it simply is an act to appease the ignorance of those religious zealots who fall on the left side of the IQ bell curve.

mehh, this again.

this is nothing new.

Civil unions should be the actual legal bonding processes for couples and marriage should be the religious ceremony that couples can choose to have or not to have but marriage should hold no legal powers.

Either way im kinda pissed that it's ok for us to fight and die for america but if we do die our loved ones won't get the full benefits they deserve. They got this shit done in the wrong order if you ask me...

Saying gays can 'marry', without really being married is like saying black people can ride in the bus, but can only sit in the back.
You either do it good or you don't do it at all.

we do have a word for this, it's called "gay marriage." In the south it's called "an abomination."

Truth is, marriage is marriage. Even "gay marriage" and "same-sex marriage" are somewhat degrading. Homosexual couples should have the same rights as anyone else, and there shouldn't be any distinction between their right to marriage and a heterosexual couples' right.

I don't see what the problem is.

And I disagree it should have a seperate term. As soon as you designate a seperate term for same sex marriage you devalue its significance and afford them second rate citizenship.

Everyone should have equal rights and everyone should be allowed to get married. If you are against it for religious reasons, your denomination doesn't have to marry gays.

This is ridiculous. It would be like muslims banning -everyone- from eating pork in a secular country. If you don't want to eat it that's fine, but everyone else should be able to eat pork. And we shouldn't have to call bacon meat strips so you can pretend were not eating pork.

TL;DR Gays like pork too.