if we need to have different words for civil and religious unions. then *someone* has to give up the word married, and i doubt you can get the churches to give it up, but i think we could make an argument for the civil govt to do so.
the people who GET married would be able to use any term they like, the LEGAL term would be different for one than the other.
and you said "clerics should not be allowed to solemnize civil unions" and i ask why not?
Did you not understand my point that many faiths also have additional terms they already use?
They also DO NOT NEED to give up the term marriage IF clergy can't solemnize civil marriages in their capacity as clergy. (You could always have notary publics do it and then the clergy could also be notary publics -- or some other workaround like that.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rm
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: and here we have the crux of the issue
Date: 2009-12-04 04:17 am (UTC)the people who GET married would be able to use any term they like, the LEGAL term would be different for one than the other.
and you said "clerics should not be allowed to solemnize civil unions" and i ask why not?
Re: and here we have the crux of the issue
Date: 2009-12-04 04:20 am (UTC)They also DO NOT NEED to give up the term marriage IF clergy can't solemnize civil marriages in their capacity as clergy. (You could always have notary publics do it and then the clergy could also be notary publics -- or some other workaround like that.)