[horatio]

Comparing gay civil unions with bestiality is an argument beneath anyone on these boards, unless you first advocate giving Irish Wolfhounds full legal majority status. Come on now.

I have no problem with two human beings joining in a union. Makes no difference to me if they're a man and woman, two men or two women. All would help stabalize society, if the two people enter into it with the intent to make a real committment.

I do not advocate forcing churches to bless the unions, but that's not required right now for a marriage to be valid.

[bimboeruption]

Ten years ago a discussion concerning men "marrying" men would have been beneath anyone on this board.
You make my point.

[jimt]

I have no problem with two human beings joining in a union. Makes no difference to me if they're a man and woman, two men or two women.

If that's so, why should it be restricted to two ? And why only human beings ?

[usadave]

I have no problem with two human beings joining in a union. Makes no difference to me if they're a man and woman, two men or two women.

But why limit it to only two people? If one man and two women wanted to live together as a marital group, why should we deny them this right?