Quote:
Originally Posted by willx
2) Secondly, I asked whether he would be OK if instead of allowing same-sex marriage, a new status was created that was identical in every way but was labeled differently, like "committed union" -- that way marriage could continue to be defined as between a man & woman, and we'd just have to "ctrl+f" "find and replace" our existing legislature. His response "lawyered" me a little.
Rationally he wouldn't have any issues with it, and he can understand why conservative religious types who believe "marriage is an institution directly tied to their beliefs of faith and his rules regarding behaviour and morality" but his point (which I agree with) is that the create of a status that is "different" works well when people are reasonable, rational, educated and tolerant. When they are not, the "different but the same" argument won't work and would continue to result in future discrimination.
|
This sounds similar to back in the day with Civil Rights. The whole "Seperate but equal" thing which obviously wasn't right.