My “Light Bulb Moment”- Why Civil Unions Aren’t Enough
UPDATE: I think a possibly good start by composing a standardized letter including the US Census Bureau’s information to drive home the point might help.
But imagine for a moment. Let’s say that 10-15 MILLION marriages fall into the “non-denominational” column, what head-exploding OUTRAGE there would be if suddenly ALL of these marriages could be reclassified not as marriages, but as CIVIL UNIONS???
You want full rights and recognition? Okay- then let’s show those who already HAVE them that their position is not HALF as secure as they think it is, in the present environment…
(alot of people will say, “No kidding Louise”…)
It just finally hit me why I am just NOT comfortable with Barack Obama’s stance regarding civil unions, and all it took was prepping tonight’s dinner in the kitchen with my spouse. A normal activity that couples often do, but as Charlie and I are a straight couple, we’re considered “married” because of our 1992 vows. Even though we are both lifelong atheists and married not in a church, but in our favorite waterfront restaurant. No one blinked an eye when he filed for the marriage license or 3 days later when I picked it up; no one said anything disparaging about our plans.
Except his mother, who was scandalized that my father wasn’t going to “give me away”, telling me that if I “was brazen enough to walk down the aisle by yourself, good luck to you HONEY!” (She was dead silent when we told her no church…)
Anyways… for as non-traditional as our ceremony was, it’s still called not a civil union, but a marriage.
Now to get to Obama’s views…
I’ve seen the CNN link; I’ve read the letter, have watched the speeches given by Michelle and LaBolt. And it still seems that while he does support RIGHTS, Mr Obama denies the full concept of legally accepted marriage for same sex couples, prefering to support the politically safer choice of civil unions, stating a religious conflict in the definition of marriage.
Or when in doubt, leave it up to the individual states, same as the particulars of acceptable ages or whether cousins can marry.
I find this a very disingenuous stance and a slippery slope of argument. My almost 16 year old marriage is legally recognized in every state, regardless of our lack of religious affiliation.
Just look at it this way, Mr Obama. You’re saying that religion is the reason for marriage definition, yet you say nothing about those WITHOUT religion having the right to marry.
The other day, I started to glibly comment that “Well, I guess I’m not married but civilly unionized!” and then realized I love being married and to misquote the late Charlton Heston:
You can have my marriage when you can pry my cold dead hands off the license.
I’m not giving it back, so you better be prepared to allow others to share the right to marry. Fair is fair, and enough is enough.