Now, before anyone jumps on me about this, read this in its entirety. The gay rights people are attacking the problem from the wrong angle. Instead of fighting for legalized marriage for gays, they should be fighting for legalized "Civil Unions" for everyone, religious or not. They should be fighting to get government to stop recognizing "Marriage" officially. Marriage is inherently a religious practice. By recognizing "Marriage" legally, the government is effectively violating our first amendment rights. Since marriage is defined as "between one man and one woman" by some religions, but not by all, the government is essentially saying that those religions which say it is alright for gays to marry are invalid. This is a law "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" and also "respecting an establishment of religion". Now, if the government were to stop recognizing "Marriages" as being valid for legal purposes, and instead only recognized civil unions, then there would be no violation of our rights, and no religion would feel slighted either. In this scenario, you could choose to get married in the eyes of God within your church and following its own rules, but the paperwork that is legally filed with the state would be for that of a "Civil Union". If your religion doesn't recognize "Gay Marriage" then you couldn't get married within your religion. You could, however still have a "Civil Union". Marriage is in the eyes of God, and as such open to your particular interpretation of "God". Making this one little change solves the whole "Gay Marriage" debate in such a way that neither side can argue it with any validity. Everyone who is "Married" would have a grandfathered in status of "CU" for "Civil Union" for all their tax documents. "M" could still be chosen if you like it, but it would be equivalent to "CU" in the eyes of the government with no distinction being made at all. Medical insurance, death benefits, Family Leave, Taxes, etc. could now be enjoyed by both partners since none of these "benefits" are of any religious significance whatsoever. A "Husband and Wife" (religious term) would be "Partners" (legal term) in the eyes of the government, the same as 2 men or 2 women. This is what I am going to start pushing for, and if you agree, forward this idea to everyone you know and have them fight for it as well. Let's get the government out of religion once and for all, as it was supposed to have been all along.
The first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
