At least not by the state, if this lawsuit succeeds.
That's been my stance for a while as well.I'm all for the banning of "marriage" as a government title, and replacing the same functionality with civil unions. That way, maybe the county can finally move past the gay marriage debate, everyone can have equal rights in the form of the union, and churches can still marry people if they choose (though such marriages would have no legal authority)
No, it just makes sleeping around more fun...You don't need to be married to sleep around.
Jimm Gaffigan said:Why is it that when you're single all you see are couples, and when you're in a couple all you see are hookers?
I can't tell if you're just in favor of abolishing the current terminology and replacing it with less politically loaded terms or in favor of abolishing the various privileges that marriage grants you (since a hospital, as a business, should have a right to decided who is and isn't allowed to stay at the bedside of patients).I, too, support the ending of institutionalized "marriage."
I'm in favor of ending it as a cultural institution. Nobody gets married. "Marriage," as a thing, ceases to exist. Your example of a hospital can basically be satisfied by a glorified "buddy list," or next of kin.I can't tell if you're just in favor of abolishing the current terminology and replacing it with less politically loaded terms or in favor of abolishing the various privileges that marriage grants you (since a hospital, as a business, should have a right to decided who is and isn't allowed to stay at the bedside of patients).