Finally! A solution

[Slogo]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090316/us_t...XltYXJyaWFnZQ--

wow. that's a long link

[Rev.Reverence]

Very interesting...but I think it'll start a riot...we'll see.

[TitsMcGee]

This makes perfect sense to me.

[Slogo]

Just don't make it a government institution

Seems fair

[taysteewonderbunny]

This makes perfect sense to me.

I think it makes sense, but is NOT easier than allowing gay marriage. If adopted, the state will then have to suddenly define what "a family" is, which could be terrifying if it isn't very carefully thought out. And even if well thought out, may either further erode privacies OR permit things that most people generally do NOT want to permit--like requiring people to prove that they sleep in one bed on the one hand or allowing bigamy on the other. I don't think it an ideal solution either, for I believe it is highly likely, as the article pointed out, that neither the strict heterosexualists nor the gay marriagers will be content--and not because the solution isn't sensible, but because it isn't emotionally satisfying to either party. They really would split that baby in two. Still, I think the proposal will hopefully get people thinking more about the issue outside the so clearly defined ruts we've been in for the past decade. Maybe one day an answer like this would be acceptable.

[Rev.Reverence]

I think it makes sense, but is NOT easier than allowing gay marriage. If adopted, the state will then have to suddenly define what "a family" is, which could be terrifying if it isn't very carefully thought out. And even if well thought out, may either further erode privacies OR permit things that most people generally do NOT want to permit--like requiring people to prove that they sleep in one bed on the one hand or allowing bigamy on the other. I don't think it an ideal solution either, for I believe it is highly likely, as the article pointed out, that neither the strict heterosexualists nor the gay marriagers will be content--and not because the solution isn't sensible, but because it isn't emotionally satisfying to either party. They really would split that baby in two. Still, I think the proposal will hopefully get people thinking more about the issue outside the so clearly defined ruts we've been in for the past decade. Maybe one day an answer like this would be acceptable.

I choose to define a marrige as a contract between 2 (or more) people & their conceptualization of the deity of their choosing...but I am a radical.

I actually dig that it will put the more than 1 mate thing up to the individual churches governing the people that will to be governed thus...MOST will want to be left alone about such things..they will gravitate to UU & Church Of Universal Life...who I am SURE would be in the fore in sanctioning such things...

...yeah..there will ALWAYS be abuses anytime there are rules set to govern.

[candyman]

It may be a step towards progress but...we have alot more shit to worry about. Don't get me wrong, this is important, but it falls very far behind alot of other things.

We need to educate the people of this country on what our collective "voice" is. People gave me so much shit for voting down the gay marriage bill over in Wisconsin, and the bill failed keeping gay marriage illegal. I don't hate gay people, in fact I am friends with many, but I did this to teach them a lesson. The government really does have the ability to run things well, despite popular belief. However, when we do not use our voice, which happens way too much, it leaves room for the government to improvise.

There is hope, and there are many more solutions. The only problem is...humanity. All these people want EVERYTHING in their proposals. The people voting against them want none of it. Solution: compromise

Every single issue that I am passionate about is really heated, however I am more than willing to sit down with the other side and work something out...and yes this has worked very well for me. Why is nobody else doing this?

I am actually suprised that there have not been any rips on christians yet...good job. Being a former christian I still know many of them and you would be supprised at their stance on gay marriage...well, maybe not catholics...