ANSWERS: 37
  • I would support it, Everyone should have the same rights, Race, Sex, Age, Gay or Straight, should not come into it.
  • I support it completley!
  • Yes, definitely would support. What's the logic behind opposing?
  • Yes. I would support any law that allows and protects the legal and civil rights of any citizen.
  • Yes such a law would have my total support and I would be willing to campaign as a member of the Legal profession to try to get this law on the books.
  • I would totally support that law. I believe that everyone has an equal opportunity for everything, including same-sex marriage
  • I would support it. If they can live together why not marriage. They need to be able to have children/community property. be able to support one another and not have the law say well your not the husband/wife you dont have rights to access there medical records or make any medical decisions for this person. If you've been some one's partner thru thick and thin they should have the right. no matter what.
  • I would completely OPPOSE IT! Seperate but Equal is NOT EQUAL!!! We've already done this with segragation!
  • support. those who oppose are gay. what's the big deal it a political tatic to focus attention away from this administration so they can get all the oil and money they can.
  • I would support it, but it would be better if it was called "marriage", rather than "civil union". In the eyes of the state there should be no difference between a heterosexual and homosexual union. If a religion wants to be exclusional and judgemental, than maybe they should have the right to deny a religious ceremony if they think it is wrong - but not the government.
  • I would support same-sex civil unions although I would prefer something equal to marriage. It's a step in the right direction.
  • I would support it with the proviso that, at some point in the near future, "civil unions" were allowed to become marriages. I fully support the right of two adults to be married, but I think realistically we have to take baby steps with the older, more conservative mentality in Washington.
  • I would support it only if it afforded ALL, not "many" of the rights of marriage, and IF marriages also are called "civil unions". Legal unions between people should all be called the same thing.
  • I would definately support it. Here in Canada we can be married, giving us all the same rights and freedoms of a hetrosexual couple. Why should it be any different just because I love my wife instead of the traditional husband! What's the diff? We're to people who will spend the rest of our lives together...just because neither of us has a penis doesn't mean we don't face the same socio-economical problems any straight couple does!
  • No, I would not support that. I don't see why they can not be MARRIED and have ALL the rights of married coupules! That's WRONG.
  • Whoa the question made it sound like gays are another species or something. They are people just as smart as the rest, and should have the same rights as straight people. They are the same as us, just with a different sexual preference.
  • support. hands down.
  • I would support it, and then advocate forward for them to have ALL of the rights of married couples. I have so many bad things to say about people who oppose it, that if I tried, it would come out a jumbled verbal ball of rage.
  • support.
  • This is a real loaded question and strikes at the very heart of our Constitution. I favor civil union legislation and oppose ALL marriage legislation. It doesn’t matter if it is a marriage between a man and woman or a same sex marriage. They are BOTH wrong. The United States is a sovereign nation. It derives its power from the Constitution. The Constitution is the document that “we the people” used to grant certain powers to the government. At the end of the document we added 10 amendments, the Bill of Rights.” These are rights that we expressly reserved to ourselves. One of those rights was the freedom of religion. It says that we are free to practice any religion we choose free of government prosecution and that the government can take NO action to establish a state religion. Marriage is a religious concept not a civil contract. Having any laws pertaining to and regulating marriage is in violation of the constructional ban on establishing a state religion. The whole situation is further aggravated by the regulations of the Internal Revenue Service and tax departments of the individual states that grant preferred status to “married” couples. Marriage Laws should be removed from all of our statutes and replaced with civil union laws that are identical in preferences. Any couple currently joined under marriage laws will be considered to be in civil unions. The effort to break a civil union will be similar to the effort involved in a divorce of marriage. Civil unions will NOT be limited to sexual partners. A civil union will be a contract between two people who assume “life responsibility” for each other.
  • pardon the ignorance here, but what is the technical dif btw civil union and marriage? if it's completely in court and all, [[and they'd get all the same rights just not some]] then you'll have my support hands down. the minute they want to force the churches and holy buildings and stuff to perform marriages, however, i can't. that's gotta be up to the churches themselves. some will be for, some will be against. but as far as legal in court and stuff. i'm all for it
  • We basically have such a law in the UK which was put through parliament with no real consultation of the people so that they could support or oppose.
  • i would support same sex couples. they have the same rights as non same sex couples. y shud they be deprived of things? if you are in love then why should it matter what sex you date/ marry
  • I think it's a step in the right direction, and I would support it as such. But, it's still separate but not equal. I don't understand why in the U.S., the "land of the free" why we have not legalized gay marriage yet. So many other countries have taken this huge step...even an equally huge country like Canada to our north. Allowing "civil unions" but not full, equal marriage still makes us second class citizens. Why can it not be called the same? We must all be registered to vote and exercise that right until we get rid of the right-wingers that try to write discrimination into our Constitution. I thought the preamble to our Constitution says "We the People" not "We the white, heterosexual Christian conservatives..."
  • what's this " meny of" BS?!?
  • with in a heart beat!...you shouldn't need a law in the first place
  • I would completely support the law. If I'm going to claim that I'm pro same-sex relationships, I have to be sure that I'm completely for them. People who say that "this is alright" but "this and this are wrong" are not in support for same-same relationships, no matter how much they claim to be okay with it. It just proves that they simply do not care and would rather just fit in. How I despise fakeness!
  • 10000000000% oppose it! This should not even ben an option.
  • i would definitely support. it shouldn't matter who you are in love with. you should have the same rights as everybody else.
  • yes because I would like to marry my girlfriend of four years.
  • Why not give all the rights? Who is doing the rights selections here. This is about respect for those who love. Here in Canada gay men and women are in the armed services; car plants; office C.E.O.s. Stop treating men and women like children. Would you like it?
  • oppose. we have to fight harder for the same rights as hetero sexual couples. (im straight, but I support the HRC) Marriage is a union between two people who are IN LOVE and want to spend the rest of their lives together. if civil unions happen, it'll all stop there, and the way to marraige will end...
  • Support 100%
  • I would support a law for same-sex civil unions.
  • Thjs is a moot point considering the Supreme Court ruling.
  • that wouldnt bother me any

Copyright 2018, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy