Let us suppose we elect a Democratic President in 2008 and one of his/her positions is that he/she is against gay marriage, but for civil unions. Some questions arise.
How will civil unions be made legal? Will there be a Federal law passed? What are the probabilities it will pass by 2010? 2020? 2050?
When civil unions do become law, how will we implement them?
Because the whole basis for not permitting same sex marriages is that God has reserved marriage for a man and a woman will the words relating to marriage become reserved as well? In all the statutes and regulations that exist around the country will we have to go into the text and add new words for civil unions wherever "marriage, marry, married, wed, wedding, wedded, etc." are used? Sometimes, I think, marriage is described as being a "union." That could be confusing.
If the "marriage" words are reserved for marriage only, what words will we use for civil unions? "civil unionized, unioned, ???" Will the words "divorce and divorced" also be reserved for the marriage entity? If we used "divorced" to describe people who are no longer married or no longer civil unioned (man how awkward), couldn’t someone think that if someone is now divorced then they must have been previously married?
And, if we are in the business of reserving words, what about "God." If marriage is reserved by God for a man and a woman wouldn’t it be wrong to invoke God in a civil union ceremony? Won’t the enabling legislation for civil unions have to make it clear that God cannot be used to solemnize a civil union?
How will we handle the two entities, marriage and civil union, when we are educating our children? What will we say when they ask why we have two different entities? Won’t that require the schools to explain the difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals? If so, won’t we have to be very careful about the words we use? Won’t we have to dictate exactly what the teacher should say? Perhaps it would be better to have an official government film that would be shown in class whenever the issue comes up.
How will we reconcile civil unions with slavery and racial discrimination? What will we do if some student asks if separate-but-equal marriage/civil union entities aren’t the same as separate-but-equal bus seats, schools, restaurants, movie seats, water fountains, hotels, baseball leagues, army divisions, etc.? What if the student asks why we stopped separate-but-equal then, but implemented it now? What if the students become confused and think that those who insist on separate-but-equal for marriage/civil union are just the same as racists and slavers of yesteryear? How will we handle this situation? Maybe we should just ban such discussion from the schools.
Also what happens to all the forms and computer screens with "marriage" boxes on them? Will we just add a new code to the marriage box or must we add a new box for "civil unioned?" What will the cost be for making the programming changes? Who should pay for it?
What about the people who now perform marriages. Will they be required to perform civil unions as well? If not, can we still cling to the claim that the two entities are separate-but-equal?
What about adultery statutes. Is having sex out of civil-union the same as having sex out of wedlock?
I know that there is probably nothing to worry about. People who are forced into the separate-but-equal civil union entity will not be ostracized. Their children, oh, my god, can they have or adopt children? Well, surely they can, and surely their children won’t be teased mercilessly at school because they are part of a civil union.
I don’t know why I am worrying about this. Our political leaders and our men of God will do the Christian thing and all will be well.
Update: Does anyone know which states permit gay marriages or civil unions?