Why I do not believe in Civil Unions!

Or rather, "Why I believe Civil Unions will save us all!"

OK, hot topic, barreling strait at it!

So I have had a problem with the current discussion over same-sex marriage.  To me it is really a viewpoint and perspective breakdown and seems simple but is currently over complicating political dialog so I wish to propose a simple, fair and reasonable solution.

If

• Their is a sepparation of church and state
• Marriage is defined by god/religion
• We want equal rights for all
• We don't want to see a repeat of Separate but Equal rights

Then

• Why are we having a discussion about something called same-sex marriage?
• Can we protect one subculture from another?
• Will we face up to inequality and fix it?
• Can we maintain that sacred separation of church and state?

YES!

Some religious/conservatives would like to ensure that a religious definition of marriage is constitutionally protected and that wording is friendly to their view point.  Whether State or Federally controlled these people are messing up our sacred church-state relationship by being shortsighted in their solution.

Some activists for equal rights have proposed the Civil Union as an alternative (which creeps me out). One subculture asking for the same rights as another subculture shouldn't even be a question but if it is, changing what you call it doesn't create equality, it hinders.  I understand those who argue "one step at a time" the solution put forth approaches, but lets call a duck a duck and a goose a goose.  Lets pretend for a moment those who are fighting for equal rights and those who are trying to protect their ideology are on the same side, because they should be.

I know there are several examples of cross over in the above but I don't want to be writing for the next several hours.

There should be no governmental definition or control over marriage! The legal rights of couples who wish to be recognized as "legally unified" should be governed over, we'll call that Civil Union and gender/sexuality isn't even a part of its process.  You and your chosen/significant other go to a governing office (such as a courthouse) and you file your legal documents and pay what ever fees are required and there is some form of governmental approval or not and you are recognized as a Civil Union or not.  

It protects the Church from the state as well!  The government doesn't get to tell the church who is married or not (cause right now you can go to a courthouse in most areas and get married rather than stand before the church).  If you want to be married you have to go before those people who should be governing such things, a religious/spiritual leader/organization.  Whether before or after or instead of or aside of,   you go before (and for simplicity and shortening my typing I am just going to say church instead of all the other words that could replace it) your church and you follow what ever guidelines they require and tithe in what ever way they require and the marriage is sanctified by them.

The short: Civil Unions are governmental and should fall under government over-site, Marriage is spiritual and should fall under spiritual over-site.  You can have one or the other or both, but keep the two separate and quit putting religion into legal structure and vice a versa.

Ask a minority in the south prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 how they feel about Separate but Equal solutions and then look at how you are trying to move forward.  No matter which side you are on, it is dirty and hurtful at some point unless you are looking at equality for the future!