Do you believe that gays should have seperate but equal rights to marriage?

Or should there be no compromise? (meaning equal marriage for everyone)


Why or why not?Do you believe that gays should have seperate but equal rights to marriage?
marriage is different in the minds of many, myself included, then any civil document can accommodate. i mean that in more then just a religious context, but in the nature of tradition and family as well.





when we exclude, as in saying ';this group may have marriage and civil union while this group many have only civil union';, what are we saying? just as a legalistic matter we are saying that one group has more standing, more rights under the law, than another. how is that equal? it really doesn't matter what the compensations are economically, or as recognition of family membership....you are still saying that under the law one family has more rights than the next...you are saying they can be legally married while another couple can't....there is no way to equalize what it inherently not equal.





thirty years ago i ';married'; my wife, we didn't convene a civil union, or enter into a domestic partnership...we were married...in the eyes of the law....and that matters to us...whether or not it does to anyone else doesn't much matter...it does to us.





much love and hope. pjDo you believe that gays should have seperate but equal rights to marriage?
I was one of those people who didn't care about the terminology as long as the rights were the same. In truth, if I thought that could be the case its what I would be pushing for. But I no longer believe it possible for there to be two terms for one partnership. It cannot be marriage for some and union for others.





I don't care about the word ';marriage';. If they changed the legal document from ';marriage certificate'; to ';domestic partnership certificate'; then we'd all have domestic partnerships. I'd be ok with that. But if some people get legal marriage, everyone should.





And it will happen because its right.
Separate but equal was a doctrine which was ruled Unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.





Still, I suppose we should be happy with the ';baby steps'; moving in the direction of equality. In my home state (Washington), we just passed Ref. 71 which confirmed the right for same sex couples to have ';everything but marriage.'; As much as I wish it was simply marriage, at least we no longer discriminate in terms of rights against same sex couples. One small step at a time.
If they're separate but equal, wouldn't they be just as equal?


Except everyone knows it's not. It's unconstitutional and just dumb to say that we can be equal as long as we're separate. And we have the right to full equality.
Separate does NOT mean equal. Equal rights for everyone under the law, not just for the privileged few. Compromise is just another way of giving in and keeping us quiet.
Yes, by all means! We need segregation again!





It should be equal, this is USA for God's sake.
definetly equal :)


everyone should be treated exactly the same!
we are a secular country ruled by a Constitution.


there should be no discrimination about who gets married for anyone.
gay marriage is a compromise, the more extreme position is no legal marriage for anyone
Equal rights, under the law. Churches can do whatever they like.
I agree with Cool Dude.
I can't understand why gays would want to marry, they're already sinning, so why not sin again and not get married and just have sex anyway?