>what is second class about civil unions?
They are seperate, and as noted elsewhere, NOT equal to marriage. Pretending they are makes them second class. And that's assuming that you can live with the whole 'seperate but equal' thing, after all the concept has such a glowing history. Some of us reject that whole concept as inherently demeaning when it's imposed, if same sex marital partners can have a civil union then heteros should have the same option. Is anyone in the 'Okay, we'll let them have civil union' camp advocating for that?
And besides, the church I belong to performs marriages, not civil unions. Notary publics do that at city hall. People who choose to marry usually want to celebrate a marriage, not a civil union.
PC
N P Childs
'I'm Mister Bad Example, the stranger in the dirt, I like to have a good time and I don't care who gets hurt'.
-Mr. Bad Example, W Zevon