It is not a "rebranding". It's getting the government completely out of the religion business. If you take the word "marriage" completely out of it, and put "marriage" into the powers of the church, then the problems are solved, as there are churches for everyone who wants one, but the governmnent is supposed to offer equality for all.

What it does is extract the part of the union that the government should be involved in; the part where it's a legal contract.

If you take the word "marriage" completely out of it, and put "marriage" into the powers of the church, then the problems are solved, as there are churches for everyone who wants one, but the governmnent is supposed to offer equality for all.

I think this is one of those things that is true in theory, but in practice people are still going to get all worked up about it. From the State's point of view, marriage isn't about religion per se.

Happy Birthday Strega!

I'd like to have the same rights as straight people, full stop, however unlikely I am to actually exercise them. But part of me does like the idea of pushing for technically equivalent civil unions earlier, and then watching fundies' blood pressure skyrocket when we go ahead and refer to it as marriage anyway regardless of what the actual license says.

The problem with that is that you end up with today's hodge-podge of things described as civil unions that vary wildly in what they actually mean and protect, and at the same time create the impression that the issue is resolved.

Yeah, Kat, it's a chicken/egg thing. Do I have the ability to ignore cacophony (and yet pull out a kid for not practicing the right thing from across the room) because of my job or do I have my job because I have the skill? After seven years, it's hard to tell.

I love "Smooth," I can't help it.

Maybe it's cause you like "Rockford," ita. Which I like better than those other shows, myself, but I would watch them if there was some sort of procedural emergency or something.

It is not a "rebranding". It's getting the government completely out of the religion business. If you take the word "marriage" completely out of it, and put "marriage" into the powers of the church, then the problems are solved, as there are churches for everyone who wants one, but the governmnent is supposed to offer equality for all.

Yes. This. I think a church, mosque, synagogue, temple, what-have-you has every right to say to whom they will or will not administer what they see as a sacred rite. Of course, the congregants in those religions also have every right to push for change if they see that the bureaucracy of their faith needs a good kick in the rump.

Thanks for the birthday wishes! I think I'm officially old since I keep falling asleep around 10 and waking up at 5 AM. Plus I just spent 10 minutes thinking, "Wow, the space heater isn't helping at all" before I realized it was on "fan."

Maybe coffee would be helpful.

Happy belated, Strega.

I think I give in. One last ER trip before the hols.

Sorry, ita.

I think a church, mosque, synagogue, temple, what-have-you has every right to say to whom they will or will not administer what they see as a sacred rite.

Absolutely. I'm still annoyed the Catholic church won't let me take Communion, but that's totally their call.