re: #262 calochortus

If civil unions were essentially civil marriages, it would work, but as I said, they aren’t. As an atheist the religious aspects of marriage aren’t relevant to me, but I hadn’t given a lot of thought to the semantics of it all. I think the bottom line is that there isn’t any point in making up new terms-if you care, just draw a line between a civil marriage and a religious one. It shouldn’t matter to anyone but the couple involved which kind they select.

That was my thinking before the legal entanglement was pointed out. That could work in theory, but can’t reasonably be implemented. (Think of 50+ states, many wildly hostile to gay anything.)

Can’t go into details, but a situation working as an ACA navigator made my straight goy self a yenta to an Alabama gay couple. Was working way outside my training, there.