i'd also vote for full-fledged marriage for all, of course. i'd have to think about which of the two options i'd prefer if i were choosing between those two, but either would accomplish all the goals that i see as important, and either would be a massive improvement over the current situation in most parts of this country.
and i guess if a provision specifically said ‘“marriage” shall henceforth be a term reserved for religious institutions’, i'd have to oppose it, but i take it what you meant by that was that the term ‘marriage’ would have no legal weight and that the state would make no effort to define or regulate it - that basically any private institution or individual (religious or secular) could make its own decision about how to use the word.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-04 02:39 am (UTC)and i guess if a provision specifically said ‘“marriage” shall henceforth be a term reserved for religious institutions’, i'd have to oppose it, but i take it what you meant by that was that the term ‘marriage’ would have no legal weight and that the state would make no effort to define or regulate it - that basically any private institution or individual (religious or secular) could make its own decision about how to use the word.