Well, I don’t think the current progressive system is right, either. However, the point I was making is that it originally had nothing to do with sex, but was purely about making life easier for households where the two principals weren’t a married coup,e. IIRC, it gave them some automatic legal rights, such as hospital visitation, too,
The problem is that the gays took it over and made it sound like it was all about them, which is why it never got off the ground and now they’re trying to take over marriage. And forget about all those other households that would have benefitted.
I'm sorry to disagree with you; but I don't that was ever the initial intent. It was a foot in the door for homos. Again, what if there are more than two "principals" living in the same household? What if I have two invalid siblings living with me so I can care for both of them?
As far as hospital rights, I think every patient can grant or deny permission to visitors. If you you're talking about the right to "pull the plug" that's far different.
How do you feel about child adoption in regards to homo civil unions?. They now have that right; and as result Catholic adoption agencies have been shuttered.
I firmly believe that less opportunities for adoptions leads to more abortions.
A civil union, also referred to by a variety of other names, is a legally recognized arrangement similar to marriage. These unions have been established in a number of countries since the late 1990s, often developing from less formal domestic partnership legislation. In Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, they have since been replaced, and in a number of other countries supplemented, by same-sex marriage. Civil unions are often seen by campaigners as a "first step" towards legalizing marriage for same-sex couples. While civil unions are predominantly established for both opposite-sex and same-sex couples, in a number of countries they are available to same-sex couples only.