I am actually not in favor of gay marriage

[MikeWaters]

however, I have no problem with civil unions that are the same as marriage, minus the name.

In other words, semantically, I think the word "marriage" should apply to man/woman.

But as to the legal stuff, I have no problem if it is applied to gays.

I also favor provisions for polygamy in cases of cultural/religioius beliefs.

I find it odd that the church is apparently requesting that polygamists in Africa divorce all but one wife before baptism. What happens to these discarded wives and children? It doesn't fit with my beliefs in taking care of what you started. But who am I?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

however, I have no problem with civil unions that are the same as marriage, minus the name.

In other words, semantically, I think the word "marriage" should apply to man/woman.

But as to the legal stuff, I have no problem if it is applied to gays.

I also favor provisions for polygamy in cases of cultural/religioius beliefs.

I find it odd that the church is apparently requesting that polygamists in Africa divorce all but one wife before baptism. What happens to these discarded wives and children? It doesn't fit with my beliefs in taking care of what you started. But who am I?

Agreed on all counts.

[RockyBalboa]

Call me crazy, but I whole heartedly support what the church is expressing here and their attempts to encourage members of the church to be firmly against same sex marriage.

It is not discriminatory for our prophet to reflect the ideals of The Lord and the plan of salvation, but what do I know?

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

however, I have no problem with civil unions that are the same as marriage, minus the name.

In other words, semantically, I think the word "marriage" should apply to man/woman.

But as to the legal stuff, I have no problem if it is applied to gays.

I also favor provisions for polygamy in cases of cultural/religioius beliefs.

I find it odd that the church is apparently requesting that polygamists in Africa divorce all but one wife before baptism. What happens to these discarded wives and children? It doesn't fit with my beliefs in taking care of what you started. But who am I?

I didn't realize amendments to the constitution were enforced in Africa.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

however, I have no problem with civil unions that are the same as marriage, minus the name.

In other words, semantically, I think the word "marriage" should apply to man/woman.

But as to the legal stuff, I have no problem if it is applied to gays.

I also favor provisions for polygamy in cases of cultural/religioius beliefs.

I find it odd that the church is apparently requesting that polygamists in Africa divorce all but one wife before baptism. What happens to these discarded wives and children? It doesn't fit with my beliefs in taking care of what you started. But who am I?

I have mixed feelings about this position.

On the one hand, when two institutions have have different names, but are technically the same, we run the risk of 'separate but equal' problems like those under jim crow. Not all equals are alike.

On the other hand, if civil unions could also be extended to man and woman situations, and male/female couples had a choice to either be 'married' or to enter a 'civil union,' then I would give such a system my full support, and I would appeal to whatever civil authority held the power and would ask that my 'marriage' be turned into a 'civil union' instead.

I know one couple that has been together for more than ten years, but refuse to get married. I asked them why they never tie the knot, since they are obviously in it for the long haul. They say they don't want to buy into an institution that is used to discriminate against gay couples. Who knows if that is their real reason, but I can understand the logic.