S/O Gay Marriage Poll

[mommylamb]

It seems like the majority of posters here-- whether they consider themselves conservative or liberal in other areas-- are pretty supportive of gay marriage. I'm just curious if that's the case, so here is an anonymous poll.

[LMPC]

HUGE LGBT supporter here. I volunteered before the primaries with a couple of organizations that were trying to get Amendment 1 voted down. I firmly believe that marriage should include same sex couples.

[Green_Tea]

100% in support of same sex marriage and have yet to hear a single well reasoned, logical argument for why it should not be legal.

[Giantbear]

Not sure where to vote, i feel the government should only recognize civil unions for ALL couples, be them heterosexual, homosexual or lesbian. Leave "marriage" to the religions. The only reason the government should have for having the legal designation of 'civil union' is to allow certain benefits and enforce certain obligations of the parties entering into the union. Sounds cold and calculated?? it is, but the government has no place in emotion, a civil union is simply a contract between two individuals. And i have always felt this way.

[lizzywednesday]

I see Giantbear's point about keeping the government out of the emotion and leaving "marriage" to religions, and I do appreciate the mention of "civil union" being recognized by the state for everyone, including hetero couples, but I'm sure there would be some way to twist that somewhere. (I'm skeptical that "civil union" will ever mean the same thing as "marriage" to anyone who doesn't use that reasoning, so that's why I use the "marriage" language.)

I support equal marriage rights for everyone and I always have.

I actually wonder whether or not my "two souls made one" letter to the editor of my college paper exists online ... it's a good 15 years old at this point, but it's still my earliest articulation of the way I felt on the topic at first and how I continue to feel.

[LMPC]

Not sure where to vote, i feel the government should only recognize civil unions for ALL couples, be them heterosexual, homosexual or lesbian. Leave "marriage" to the religions. The only reason the government should have for having the legal designation of 'civil union' is to allow certain benefits and enforce certain obligations of the parties entering into the union. Sounds cold and calculated?? it is, but the government has no place in emotion, a civil union is simply a contract between two individuals. And i have always felt this way.

While I totally agree with the sentiment (I'm fairly certain this is kind of how it works in Italy), I think the word "marriage" has already infiltrated our lexicon to the extent that it would be hard to back away from using the word now.

[sophiesmom03]

Not sure where to vote, i feel the government should only recognize civil unions for ALL couples, be them heterosexual, homosexual or lesbian. Leave "marriage" to the religions. The only reason the government should have for having the legal designation of 'civil union' is to allow certain benefits and enforce certain obligations of the parties entering into the union. Sounds cold and calculated?? it is, but the government has no place in emotion, a civil union is simply a contract between two individuals. And i have always felt this way.

I would be ok with this. I don't care what it's called but I do think it's important for all people to have the same rights, exactly the same, regardless if they are gay or hetero.

I also think it's fine for churches to decide whom they will marry - totally separate issue IMO. But the legal, state recognized and taxpayer supported institution should be available to all.

Just imagine the backlash though if there were a campaign to change all "marriages" to "civil unions"

[khalloc]

I support equal rights and always have.

[marymoo86]

Not sure where to vote, i feel the government should only recognize civil unions for ALL couples, be them heterosexual, homosexual or lesbian. Leave "marriage" to the religions. The only reason the government should have for having the legal designation of 'civil union' is to allow certain benefits and enforce certain obligations of the parties entering into the union. Sounds cold and calculated?? it is, but the government has no place in emotion, a civil union is simply a contract between two individuals. And i have always felt this way.

This exactly. Under the eyes of government a contract is a contract as long as it is entered into by 2 consenting adults.

I do not think religious institutions should be foreced into acceptance (or performance) unless it is the will of the congregation.

[cvanbrunt]

Not sure where to vote, i feel the government should only recognize civil unions for ALL couples, be them heterosexual, homosexual or lesbian. Leave "marriage" to the religions. The only reason the government should have for having the legal designation of 'civil union' is to allow certain benefits and enforce certain obligations of the parties entering into the union. Sounds cold and calculated?? it is, but the government has no place in emotion, a civil union is simply a contract between two individuals. And i have always felt this way.

This, exactly. I think the comment that marriage is so embedded in our lexicon is absolutely part of the problem. I may be wrong, but I think some of the opposition to gay marriage from the religious community is the use of the word. If the religious component was divorced from the legalities of the arrangement I wonder if the opposition would be eased somewhat. This is another example of why the separation of church and state is a huge issue for me.