the difference is choice, a biological block which prevents bearing children is different than a lifestyle choice which prevents bearing children

the difference is there is NO case of homosexual coupling creating children, therefore the reproductive significance is null compared to that of heterosexual coupling

the biological significance of a union between a male and a female is incomparable to the biological significance of any other type

infertile couples are not the standard for heterosexual coupling, but infertility is absolutely standard for homosexual coupling

no real worries about the reationship situation as this is completely such a Non-issue if you were to sit back and look at it. I have worked through adoptions and fertility issues and it's always treated the same...no gender issues according to insurance. That would have to be the bottom line as far as I am concerned.

I dont think insurance should have gender issues either

Im like Tina Turner, when she divorced Ike, she only wanted to keep her name

take all the 'benefits' marriages receive to promote the union and apply them to all types of relationships where the adults wish to enter into such an agreement of commitment

but let there be legal contracts stating such without messing with marriage,,,leave us our name,, take the other stuff that is important

That's just being silly now msharomony...That was a recognized. legal union. Tina took responsibility and maintained her responsibility as an adult. You are now shading the intent and the purpose. Take a beath and step back to understand where you are goin with this.

would their be alimony for "civil Unions"? what would be the negative impact of breaking a "civil union"? What would keep people from abusing the system?

I can see some of Mrs. Harmony's views. Women gets preggers she has to usually stop working at some point and there are hospital bills and then raising the kid etc. You don't always make a fiscal decision when you get pregger, you do with adoption.

no, just making an analogy that I understood quite well

the male female union is a legitimately SIGNIFICANT union and the only significant union from which our very existence stems and needs not be tampered with in regards to its 'special' marital status

as far as other 'consentual commitments', they can have all the legal benefits married couples do that they perceive they are being denied, but the institution itself nor its name, need to be tampered with


Leave the sex out of it, make it a contract and you dont have to be sanctioning sodomy, make it strictly about the commitment to share life and assets and call it a union

let marriage continue to be a union to promote the biological family

When you respond to those who have requested consideration for company benefits to be extended to a same-sex partner...

Exactly what State law or part of the State constiitution do you tell them dictates what benefits a private company can offer to it's employees?

Since when does same sex constitute to males and sodomy.......and how do know hetero's don't practice sodomy in their marriages? Either way neither has anything to do with sanctioning or not sanctioning sodomy.................

I learned a long time ago homosexuals are not happy with equal rights.They want special treatment everywhere they go.I will agree that the only difference between homosexuals and the rest of the society is the way the have sex.You have anal sex with another guy and suddenly you are better than everyone else.


I believe this is the main reason society turns a deaf ear to the homosexuals on issues like gay marriage.It's either their way or your a racist,homophobe who should be locked up in a hole in the ground.There is no middle ground with these people.

Isn't that the lawmakers fault for making sexual orientation a discrimination parameter though?

I totally agree.I don't think any race or group of people should get any special rights because of the color of their skin or sexual status.We have so many laws right now there is no equality for anyone.If you happen to be a straight white male or female you are treated by our Government as a nearly worthless person.It doesn't matter if it's jobs or some other issue.If your a white male you might as well not even exist.

I believe all these issues should be voted on by the public and what the public says is what these laws should be.No more armchair dictatorship,and no more Government knows what is best for you.

How many words in the English language have dual meaning or even more than two meanings?

If the word 'marriage' is the only issue then simply consider 'marriage' as having two definintions

Definition one: marriage - religiously recognized ceremony...etc

Definition two: marriage - A State sanctioned union of two consenting adults to accept a long term commitment to each other inclusive of all the legal responsibilities and benefits of this union.

That way, a couple can choose which form of marriage they want recognized and by whom.

thomas gets a free drink

is there an american adult who thinks a 'wedding night' involves watching television or just cuddling?


Nullification of a marriage is commonly called annulment. Annulment is the process by which a Court states that a marriage never legally existed. An annulment must be based on mental illness, fraud, forced consent, physical incapacity to consummate the marriage, lack of consent to underage marriage or bigamy.

in other words to NULLIFY a marriage, one condition is if there is no CONSUMMATION,(meaning there is a legal and social expectation that sex will occur)

this is the rather sexually open western culture, part of the legal sanctioning of marriage involves sanctioning the SEXUAL union as well

the only, non controversial sexual union, the only NECESSARY sexual union is the male female sexual union so sanctioning it is logical


all other forms of sex are ALTERNATIVES , which should remain personal choices and not government sanctioned institutions

and lets redefine the legal definition of adult to have two meanings

adult- a person who has attained the age of majority

adult2- a person who has reached maturity


biology matters, no reason the laws shouldnt reflect that

let marriage stay as a union in which a PHYSICAL union is expected to be a part

let other unions be contracts, with conditions to be explicitly set by those involved

mothers and daughters should be able to join in a union(with sex not a social expectation or legal one)

brothers and sisters, best friends, neighbors, relatives, or whomever, should be able to CONSENT to enter into an exclusive commitment for a lifetime with NO regard to physical union

but marriage should include the expectation of a physical union, and thus only has reason to be promoted to continue the physical union NECESSARY to continue life(male female)

Government already has sanctioned it by making sexual orientation a protected group......so u just made my point............anyways you were talking about sodomy and females same sex do not practice sodomoy and not all male same sex practice sodomization......guess it would depend upon the couple as to whether they prefer oral satisfaction or not andI agree with Red that there are two form of marriage one as a religious institution and one as a state recognized institution.....I.e. justice of the peace

the main(most sensitive) difference is that a man bends another man over and penetrates his behind,

and that the relationship has no reproductive value



It also has consequences which leads to many medical problems that a normal couple do not share.

Did someone say lesbians?