Wouldn't it make more sense, from an achieving-ends standpoint, for the gay-marriage lobby to argue for the abolishment of heterosexual marriage in the eyes of the law and give everyone civil unions?
No, because that would mean pulling out the rug from under people who are currently married—for example, most people who get health insurance from their spouses' employers would lose it. The only way to avoid that would be to define "civil union" to be a synonym for "marriage", which would defeat the point.
Abolishing marriage
Date: 2008-05-18 12:33 am (UTC)No, because that would mean pulling out the rug from under people who are currently married—for example, most people who get health insurance from their spouses' employers would lose it. The only way to avoid that would be to define "civil union" to be a synonym for "marriage", which would defeat the point.