You don’t appreciate the biological differences between men and women and the differences that CIVIL law have instituted in dealing with these differences.
I appreciate the biological differences between men and women, I just don't view marriage the way you do.
Whether it is religious or civil, the differences are real.
I totally disbelieve in your religion, it is fantasy, I simply hope that people who engage in fantasies (religious or otherwise) are healthy enough about it especially as it concerns the way they relate to others, myself included.
Civil unions are a reasonable way of dealing with these differences in a creative and fair matter without disturbing the civil legal precedents, or the religious aspects.
If one does not wish to disturb certain precedents/status quo, then yes, that is true. I find the status quo to be biased in the favor of fantasies, and frankly, much of the current discussion is tainted by people's reactions, their IDOLATRY of heterosexuality, which seems to be a response to a perception of being threatened by other people's sexuality. It's no better than someone IDOLIZING their homosexuality in reaction to perceived threats by heterosexuals/heterosexuality. It sometimes looks to me like FETISHIZATION of marriage in its secular institutional forms.
I am a realist. I accept that civil unions are something more people accept. But that doesn't change my view of the way marriage is treated by many people, today. It's SUPERSTITIOUS, in fact, to believe that heterosexual marriage, or whatever, is threatened by someone else's gay marriage.
