Do we have some civil need to grant "marriage" to a same-sex couple if we already have granted them their civil-union rights.
If we have already granted civil union rights, then correct me if I'm wrong, but they can call themselves "married" anyway, just like anybody else can.
Or, are you proposing legislation that prevents people from describing themselves as "married" unless they have the imprimatur of a church, as you implied earlier? I apologize if I misunderstood but that's what I thought you were saying.
There should be no such thing as a "marriage" license in any legal terms.
I agree 100%. It's just that when you say "I think the churches should be in charge of marriage" I'm not sure if what you mean is, nobody can say they're married unless a church says they are too, and we're going to enforce that with some kind of law.
That seems ridiculous. I apologize if I misunderstood but that's what I thought you were saying. I think the legal concept of "marriage" should be vacated, but I don't think there should be any legal impediment to two people adopting the
social mantle of marriage, if they chose to.