On Thu, 13 Nov 2008, John Thornton wrote:
> It makes no difference if one calls it marriage or civil union IF we
> only use one term.
This is a totally theoretical question since, in order to have civil unions be the equal term, you'd have to abolish marriage, which would be even harder than instituting gay marriage.
But I would argue that even in this science fiction counterfactual, it still isn't true. The term "civil union" wouldn't have the magic of marriage precisely because it's a new term.
The thing about the term marriage -- the good thing and the bad thing -- is that, for all the variation in the customs, there is virtually no dispute about the term. Virtually all societies in all eras have one univocal term that we translate as marriage. And it's always previously been between a man and a woman.
If we use that term and now make it between two men or two women we've accomplished something epochal that is part only epochal because it uses and transforms that pivotal term.
And if we make up a new term, not so much. The magic is gone. Removing the magic for straight people as well as gay people might be equitable. But it's not what the majority of either sex preference currently wants. And especially not the majority of gay people, for whom it means so much more. They want to have what everyone else in history has had. Not a functional equivalent.
Michael