[slang]

Originally posted by SteveDallas
..... also bans awarding the "legal incidents [of marital status]" on "unmarried" couples. That pretty much kills the "civil union" concept, doesn't it.

As I understand the situation, the ammendment is only gaining momentum because of spectacles like that in SF.

So what you are saying is that the ban would affect the current gay and hetero civil unions? Thats not a real issue with the heteros, they could just get married. Problem solved. As for the gays, why would they press the issue that drives the amendment that would ban their civil unions.

I must have missed your point SD.

Originally posted by wolf
Depends on how "civil union" is defined. But it would kill the notion of "common law" marriages.

I thought that "common law" marriages were waning in legal authority and occurance. Was that just in Pa? I know I heard something about how they were no longer valid.

Originally posted by Undertoad
That slow acceptance is why they really want to amend the Constitution. A ruling can be changed, a law can be changed, an amendment is much much more serious. This is an attempt to "lock in" their view of the culture war before it's too late.

Which is, in turn, a really terrible abuse of the Constitution.

So what you are saying is that the slow acceptance would be counteracted by an amendment that would not have widespread support without Newscom making the spectacle of defying the system in Ca? Why would he issue the licenses then? To defeat his own cause?

It would also only be a real abuse of the Constitution if the amedment was illegally passed ( like maybe......the 16th ). But then again, I can see your point with this particular example because even though it's been shown to be faulty, so much of our gov't was built upon it, it doesnt really matter whether it is legal or not. It's here to stay.

Originally posted by xoxoxoBruce
Slang, the rush may be because many of the partners are dying and don't have time to wait. Maybe?

I personally think the Gays feel they have the support for GM they need, after a long series of battles in public opinion and the courts, to overturn a stigma they have been under for so long.I dont buy the whole "marriage benefits" aspect. They are understandably pissed to have been slighted for so long and they are making a statement.