ACLU: Only 68 civil union licenses obtained in RI. Would you settle for a civil union?
|
|
|||||
|
5 votes
|
|
83% | |||
|
1 vote
|
|
17% | |||
PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — Just 68 same-sex couples obtained licenses for civil unions in Rhode Island in the first year the option was available to them.
Gay-marriage supporters said the number, announced by the American Civil Liberties Union on Monday, shows that gay and lesbian couples in Rhode Island are shunning civil unions and holding out for marriage.
"A year's worth of data make it abundantly clear that gay and lesbian couples have emphatically said 'I don't!' to the civil union law," RI ACLU executive director Steven Brown said in a statement.
Civil union laws in other states with populations similar to Rhode Island's, about 1 million people, have attracted much more interest. Hawaii issued 106 licenses within one month of a civil union law taking effect there, the ACLU said. Eighty-five licenses were issued in Delaware in the first month civil unions were available there.
Rhode Island lawmakers are expected to take up gay marriage again next year. They approved civil unions for same-sex couples last year after legislation to authorize gay marriage stalled. The civil union law allows gay couples to enter into unions that provide the same state rights and benefits given to married heterosexual couples.
The law, which took effect July 1, 2011, did little to settle the debate in the Ocean State. Gay marriage has become one of the top issues in this year's legislative races, and House Speaker Gordon Fox, a Providence Democrat, has vowed to hold a vote on same-sex marriage during the 2013 legislative session.
State Rep. Peter Petrarca, a Lincoln Democrat who sponsored the civil union law, said he isn't concerned that so few couples have taken advantage of the new law. He said he supports gay marriage but saw civil unions as a pragmatic way to give same-sex couples added rights immediately.
"It was the best thing we could do at the time," he said. "If same-sex couples want to wait to see what happens (with gay marriage) that's their right."
Criticism of the Rhode Island law centers on an exemption that allows houses of worship, religious hospitals, cemeteries and schools to refuse to recognize the civil union relationship.
Same-sex marriage is legal in New York, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C. Maine, Maryland and Washington will vote this fall on proposals to authorize gay marriage. Minnesota voters will be asked if they want to prohibit gay marriage in their state constitution.
Read More: http://news.yahoo.com/aclu-only-68-civil-union-lic...
Also, they need to STOP all the lies and myths about the gay community that they HUNT for little boys and girls, always having orgy parties, doing drugs all hours of the day, etc. These exploits are really done by the straight people more than the gay people.
Plus they have been together a lot longer as couples compared to those in traditional ones.
You tell me. I have no idea why people think this. My lawyer is gay, has been in a committed relationship for over 20 years, and is an 'elder' in his church.
Ahem.
My POINT was that if I were gay, I would settle for a civil union if my particular church wouldn't marry me and my 'other.' Marriage is a sacrament of the church.
Thanks! :-)
"One is no less married once the documents are recorded at city hall whether by Clergy or a Judge..."
True--kinda/sorta. A 'legal union' one way is as good, legally, as the other. Marriage, however, specifically refers to a sacrament of the church and as such is out of bounds for government. The ONLY involvement government might have in this case is deciding whether gay CIVIL unions are legal. Gay MARRIAGES are none of its business.
"I wouldnt belong to a church that was so bigoted..."
I'm an Anglican/Episcopalian so this point is moot. :-D
Both should carry the same weight in any states and have the same legal affords one gets in a traditional marriage.
(Not that I don't believe you, but it would be beneficial for people to know the particulars.)
Gay marriage does not lead to polygamy according
to 6000 years of human history. In countries
where polygamy is legal, marriage for gays is
illegal. In countries where same-sex marriage
is legal, polygamy is illegal.
St. Catherine’s Monastery on Mt. Sinai
A Long Tradition Of Same Sex Marriage
As churches struggle with the issue of homosexuality, a long tradition of same sex marriage indicates that the Christian attitude toward same sex unions may not always have been as "straight" as is now suggested. A Kiev art museum contains a curious icon from St. Catherine's monastery on Mt. Sinai.
It shows two robed Christian saints. Between them is a traditional Roman pronubus (best man) overseeing what in a standard Roman icon would be the wedding of a husband and wife. In the icon, Christ is the pronubus. Only one thing is unusual. The husband and wife are in fact two men.
St. Serge and St. Bacchus
Is the icon suggesting that a
homosexual or same sex marriage
is one sanctified by Christ?
The very idea seems initially shocking. The full answer comes from other sources about the two men featured, St. Serge and St. Bacchus, two Roman soldiers who became Christian martyrs.
While the pairing of saints, particularly in the early ...
Gay marriage does not lead to polygamy according
to 6000 years of human history. In countries
where polygamy is legal, marriage for gays is
illegal. In countries where same-sex marriage
is legal, polygamy is illegal.
St. Catherine’s Monastery on Mt. Sinai
A Long Tradition Of Same Sex Marriage
As churches struggle with the issue of homosexuality, a long tradition of same sex marriage indicates that the Christian attitude toward same sex unions may not always have been as "straight" as is now suggested. A Kiev art museum contains a curious icon from St. Catherine's monastery on Mt. Sinai.
It shows two robed Christian saints. Between them is a traditional Roman pronubus (best man) overseeing what in a standard Roman icon would be the wedding of a husband and wife. In the icon, Christ is the pronubus. Only one thing is unusual. The husband and wife are in fact two men.
St. Serge and St. Bacchus
Is the icon suggesting that a
homosexual or same sex marriage
is one sanctified by Christ?
The very idea seems initially shocking. The full answer comes from other sources about the two men featured, St. Serge and St. Bacchus, two Roman soldiers who became Christian martyrs.
While the pairing of saints, particularly in the early church, was not unusual, the association of these two men was regarded as particularly close. Severus of Antioch in the sixth century explained that "we should not separate in speech [Serge and Bacchus] who were joined in life." More bluntly, in the definitive 10th century Greek account of their lives, St. Serge is openly described as the "sweet companion and lover" of St. Bacchus.
In other words, it confirms what the earlier icon implies, that they were a homosexual couple who enjoyed a celebrated gay marriage. Their orientation and relationship was openly accepted by early Christian writers. Furthermore, in an image that to some modern Christian eyes might border on blasphemy, the icon has Christ himself as their pronubus, their best man overseeing their gay marriage.
Gay marriages are based on
genuine love and devotion
Richard and John - together 61 years
Professor John Boswell's
Startling Discovery
The very idea of a Christian gay marriage seems incredible. Yet after a twelve year search of Catholic and Orthodox church archives Yale history professor John Boswell has discovered that a type of Christian gay marriage did exist as late as the 18th century.
Contrary to myth, Christianity's concept of marriage has not been set in stone since the days of Christ, but has evolved as a concept and as a ritual.
-----------------------------...
St. Serge and St. Bacchus,
a partnered gay couple
-----------------------------...
Professor Boswell discovered that in addition to heterosexual marriage ceremonies in ancient church liturgical documents (and clearly separate from other types of non-marital blessings of adopted children or land) were ceremonies called, among other titles, the "Office of Same Sex Union" (10th and 11th century Greek) or the "Order for Uniting Two Men" (11th and 12th century). That certainly sounds like gay marriage.
Wrong. Any copy of any church prayer book will provide ample evidence of your error. If that won't do, Google "sacrament of marriage"
"It was a construct of society that predates religion. Religion made sacraments for it."
LOL!
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? If the chicken comes first, does that make all subsequent eggs the business of government?
I don't give a shi'ite whether marriage was a 'construct of society' which predates either/any religion. It is considered a sacrament of the church NOW, and it was considered such before the founding of the country. As such it is--get ready for it--none of the government's business. CIVIL unions are the government's business, but only if you subscribe to the premise that whoever copulates/marries/unites with whom is any of the government's business at the outset. I do not.
Nope. There's only an issue when 'you (meaning anyone thus inclined)' insist that the government use the word 'marriage' to describe a union in which it has no business.
As for the rest of your quite valid concerns, I repeat: beyond recognizing, legally, that two people have 'vow-coupled,' the government has no business meddling in *marriages* of any kind. It's ONLY business is in/with CIVIL unions.
A CIVIL (or, as some people more accurately call them, secular) union is separate and distinct from marriage, and should remain such.
Civil
adj.
Law. Relating to the rights of private individuals and legal proceedings concerning these rights as distinguished from criminal, military, or international regulations or proceedings.