Because the other three things have nothing to do with what we're talking about? Because they're all legitimate statuses that anyone can have?
I mean, seriously, INDY (and AEON, et al.) ... what is the problem with gay marriage? Why do you want it to be a union and not a marriage? Is there some difference there that's important, some distinction that matters? Something I'm missing here? I mean, you wouldn't so vehemently be against gays being allowed to marry unless there was something really dangerous about it happening, right?
A person is either married or single. Why have the divorced or widowed classification?
I voted no on Prop 8 in CA because I have no problem with gays getting married.
But I stand with all the gay people and gay supporters in Washington State that put 'Civil Unions' on the ballot this last election and won their rights for equal protection.
The "everything but the word marriage" was put on the ballot in Washington by gay rights supporters because they wanted 'equal rights' and 'equal protection'.
The ballot was not sponsored or supported by 'anti- gay' groups.
Sure, we have a handfull of places were gay 'marriage' can win, but it appears only to be a few places. With initiatives like the one in Washington other states will flip. I really believe CA and Maines losing margins were close enough that by just leaving out the word 'marriage' gays would have won their rights by a popular vote, just like what happened in Washington.
That would be much better to have a record like 6 wins and 28 loses, win the most recent elections being 'wins' instead of losses.
Right now the record is something like 1 win and 33 loses?
and what won at the ballot? Equal rights and protections for gays by a popular vote! Under the term, "Unions".
The best way to win an argument? Is to frame it in away most likely to win!
Once 'unions' are law. Gays will be able to get
married and have all the same rights and benefits of 'marriage' as everyone else.