Civil Unions Don't Work

A Camden. NJ couple demonstrates how domestic partnership and civil unions failed in the real world.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• civil
• union
• gay
• marriage
• Camden
• New
• Jersey

[nclemente]

Thank you for posting this. It pretty much gives a real world account to why it is totally not equal.

[rpgboy22]

Wrong, idiot. If you want to compare homosexual molestation to hetero molestation it's easy, go to the State of Texas sex offender website where they publish the age and sex of every victim. You'll see clearly in any random sample you take from any city that over 90% of molestations are men molesting female children.

[Tobiwankanobie]

:D HEY HEY HEY HEY i still duno what a civil union is..

[evilgenius7193]

@pmw29206 wow, its so nice to see a reasonable youtube conversation for a change, instead of one filled with imaginary facts and tired rhetoric. Kudos to both of you.

[pmw29206]

@whotolduso As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to limiting peoples' rights in a country that prides itself on freedom (not to mention freedom of religion -- kinda knocks down your second paragraph a few pegs...), we need to have a valid reason to deny people the right to do something if it only affects them and really isn't anyone else's business. Gay marriage doesn't hurt anyone and makes a segment of the population incredibly happy. There's really no cons there if you think about it...

[pmw29206]

@whotolduso Tradition alone is not enough of a reason to deny people rights. No civil rights progress would happen if tradition were a valid reason to stop change. But at the end of the day, if 2 people -- or hell, 3, 4, 5 people -- decide to call their union a marriage, why do the rest of us get to tell them what to call it? If marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman to you, that's fine. Don't marry outside of those restrictions. But don't tell someone else what to call their own relationship.

[whotolduso]

@pmw29206 You're right, heterosexual marriage is not Christian, its a custom practiced by every major religion, and accepted socially (which is why it was reflected legally with the traditional name and definition).

falling in love with two people is not a choice. Your heart sometimes chooses your happines for you. So since it doesn't affect you personally, and it's not proven to hurt anyone, what's the problem with opening it to them as well?

[pmw29206]

@whotolduso Marriage means something different to different people. We all grow up wanting to fall in love and marry someone, but gay people don't get that option. I don't associate any religious ties to marriage. In my family growing up, marriage meant a loving connection. I see no reason why that same connection cannot be applied to gay people. Why allow one group's definition of marriage take precedent when that definition doesn't represent the whole population's view?

[pmw29206]

@whotolduso Well, for the record, you don't choose your sexuality but you choose to be with multiple partners... People who choose to be in polygamous relationships do make a choice. Gay people didn't have a say in the matter. I think the problem here is you're tied up on the Biblical definition of marriage. Marriage is not strictly a Christian union; Christians just want claim it.

[whotolduso]

@pmw29206 Why doesn't it? Many people are biologically capable of loving more than one person. If a man falls in love with more than one man or woman, why should we stand in the way of his happiness and force him to choose which relationship is more important?

[pmw29206]

@whotolduso Well, you bring up another argument all together, and that is whether we should still use the word marriage. I personally think it's silly and sad that people would redefine their own relationships to not allow gay people the word marriage. But in regard to your polygamy statement, it doesnt hold water. Straight people have the right to marry people whom they are biologically capable of loving Gay people don't have that right. It has nothing to do with the number of partners involved