Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sociable
The compromise which may well evolve, at least in the UK, will be some form of civil †œcontractà¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ã‚à  recognised for all statutory purposes as †œmarriageà¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ã‚à  and available to all without discrimination on the basis of gender or sexual orientation. This will still be restricted by rules based on age and existing family relationships to prevent incest and the abuse of the young.
|
I'm in total agreement with you. The trouble would begin I think, if in law there existed 'marriage'
and 'civil-union'. IMO if there is a diffrentiation in the law between the two it leaves itself open for discrimination in the future, as one of the US Court Judges stated 'different is rarely equal'. It doesn't matter in my eyes whether the law states either 'marriage' or 'civil-union', as long as it is one or the other and not both.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jerrek
Oh and, in terms of a civil union, corporations and employers should have the right to choose whether they recognize it, and whether benefits will be applied.
|
This would create an extremely dangerous precedent in my opinion, it would be starting down the road to rule by corporation, a very scary thought.