# What is the argument against "separate but equal" civil unions? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 16, 2014, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764 "2014-11-16T13:37:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/141 "2014-11-19T15:18:26Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > It’s the former. > Nonsense - anyone who wants to call it a civil union with all the same rights as traditional marriage is a bigot/a Nazi/an enemy/blah blah. > > Regards, > Shodan And if they do it in the 33 states and 18 countries where people of the same sex can get married? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/142 "2014-11-19T15:25:36Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Nonsense - anyone who wants to call it a civil union with all the same rights as traditional marriage is a bigot/a Nazi/an enemy/blah blah. If so, who cares? That’s what happened with interracial marriage – opposing interracial marriage is now considered a sign of racism. So what if opposing SSM is considered by most of society as a sign of anti-homosexual bigotry? Is this just whining? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/143 "2014-11-19T15:38:32Z")
Folks, missing Shodan’s sarcasm is pretty much making my point–as is self-righteously claiming that hurling slurs is just “accurate terminology.” ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/144 "2014-11-19T15:49:21Z")
Maybe, **tomndebb** , but I think you’re also underestimating the deleterious effects of being on the receiving end of the homophobia. One side’s stake is preserving an exclusive privilege (in the technical sense, because they’re only excluding a tiny fraction of the population), and the other’s is basic acceptance as equal human beings, something that was unthinkable when I was a kid but is now frustratingly perpetually on the brink of happening. It’s very difficult to take the semantic argument seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/145 "2014-11-19T15:54:31Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Folks, missing Shodan’s sarcasm is pretty much making my point–as is self-righteously claiming that hurling slurs is just “accurate terminology.” Sometimes using the word “oppression” isn’t being self-righteous. Sometimes it’s being accurate. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/146 "2014-11-19T15:57:37Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No, it isn’t. It is the union of one man with one woman. When two adults of the same sex get married, it is civil union. Will you acknowledge that in a majority of the states this is an incorrect statement, and that gay marriage legally exists? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/147 "2014-11-19T16:21:23Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Folks, missing Shodan’s sarcasm is pretty much making my point–as is self-righteously claiming that hurling slurs is just “accurate terminology.” Nobody’s missing his sarcasm, we just think his statement is more accurate if the sarcasm is ignored. And self-righteously calling use of accurate terminology “self-righteously hurling slurs” is far more self-righteous than the accurate use of said terminology, so, y’know, beam in your own eye and all. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/148 "2014-11-19T16:37:01Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I realize that a lot of people on both sides of the issue prefer, emotionally, to view the opposition as “doing wrong.” _meh_ It is possible to view one’s opponents, even on very divisive issues, as mistaken or as simply coming from a different frame of reference without demonizing them and portraying them as evil. It is not popular since it does not lend itself to self-righteous back patting or to whipping up the troops, but it is possible. This is a really easy position to take when you’re wholly uninvolved in the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Hellestal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ab097/32.png) [@Hellestal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hellestal)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/149 "2014-11-19T16:39:51Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > It is possible to view one’s opponents, even on very divisive issues, as mistaken or as simply coming from a different frame of reference without demonizing them and portraying them as evil. It is not popular since it does not lend itself to self-righteous back patting or to whipping up the troops, but it is possible. You are mistaken on a least one point in your post. Choosing the “unpopular” attitude of staying out of the dirt does quite easily lend itself to self-righteous back patting, as your post demonstrates so well. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/150 "2014-11-19T17:08:22Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Sometimes using the word “oppression” isn’t being self-righteous. Sometimes it’s being accurate. Sometimes it is. Arguing over the meaning of a word is not oppression. What the Far Right accomplished in the Ohio referendum in 2004 was oppression. Arguing a philosophical position that the word marriage should be reserved for a particular phenomenon is not oppression. Calling opponents in a philosophical debate evil when they are not actually calling for violence is meaningless. > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Nobody’s missing his sarcasm, we just think his statement is more accurate if the sarcasm is ignored. And self-righteously calling use of accurate terminology “self-righteously hurling slurs” is far more self-righteous than the accurate use of said terminology, so, y’know, beam in your own eye and all. :rolleyes: > [@Miller](#): > > This is a really easy position to take when you’re wholly uninvolved in the issue. Nope. There are other issues in which I am directly involved in which I hold the same views. There are definitely homophobes out there whose words and actions are evil. Characterizing every person who disagrees with one as evil might be a legitimate emotional response, but it serves no purpose beyond making one feel superior and reducing the chances that either compromise or even conversion can occur. The majority of Americans who have changed their minds on this issue in the last fifteen years were not swayed by haranguing them into recognizing their evil intentions. They were swayed by the simple expedient of seeing that homosexual couples were just normal people asking for equality in treatment. > [@Hellestal](#): > > You are mistaken on a least one point in your post. > > Choosing the “unpopular” attitude of staying out of the dirt does quite easily lend itself to self-righteous back patting, as your post demonstrates so well. :rolleyes: I have argued for SSM for a very long time, with friends, family, business associates, and the occasional stranger on the street. I simply note that it is an error to assume that all opposition is based in evil motives. I don’t think that either side is evil–although both sides include some evil participants. I think that one side is wrong; I just do not see the point of falsely portraying them as universally evil. _::: shrug :::_ ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/151 "2014-11-19T17:12:45Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Sometimes it is. Arguing over the meaning of a word is not oppression. What the Far Right accomplished in the Ohio referendum in 2004 was oppression. Arguing a philosophical position that the word marriage should be reserved for a particular phenomenon is not oppression. So, if someone argues that I can’t be “married” to my husband because I am white and he is black, but we can be “civilly unioned,” there’s no oppression there? ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/152 "2014-11-19T17:22:21Z")
nm ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/153 "2014-11-19T17:22:37Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > :rolleyes: The caliber of your argumentative style remains unchanged. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/154 "2014-11-19T17:23:03Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > So, if someone argues that I can’t be “married” to my husband because I am white and he is black, but we can be “civilly unioned,” there’s no oppression there? If someone actually takes action to prevent or interfere with your marriage, that is oppression. Simply expressing the view that you should not be married may be stupid. It may, if you know them personally or they are your employer, be hurtful. It fails to be oppression until you are actually oppressed. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/155 "2014-11-19T17:23:52Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The caliber of your argumentative style remains unchanged. I replied to the caliber of your “argument” in the manner appropriate. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/156 "2014-11-19T17:25:53Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > If someone actually takes action to prevent or interfere with your marriage, that is oppression. Simply expressing the view that you should not be married may be stupid. It may, if you know them personally or they are your employer, be hurtful. It fails to be oppression until you are actually oppressed. How about voting to ban gay marriage, or voting to support politicians who vow they would take action against gay marriage, or advocating for others to vote this way? Is that voting/advocating for oppression? ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/157 "2014-11-19T17:27:35Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > If someone actually takes action to prevent or interfere with your marriage, that is oppression. Simply expressing the view that you should not be married may be stupid. It may, if you know them personally or they are your employer, be hurtful. It fails to be oppression until you are actually oppressed. Since SSM is still being fought by people “taking action” to prevent or interfere, just as interracial marriage had people “taking action,” then how in the world is it not oppression? You seem to be trying to argue that words are meaningless and do not reflect anything but a semantic hiccup. Words can be oppressive. Words in support of actions certainly can be oppressive. Words do not exist in a vacuum. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/158 "2014-11-19T17:29:10Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Nope. There are other issues in which I am directly involved in which I hold the same views. Such as? How many of them involve a debate that hinges entirely on your worth as a person? > [@](#): > > There are definitely homophobes out there whose words and actions are evil. Characterizing every person who disagrees with one as evil might be a legitimate emotional response, but it serves no purpose beyond making one feel superior and reducing the chances that either compromise or even conversion can occur. What compromises in our civil rights do you think gay people should have gone for? > [@](#): > > The majority of Americans who have changed their minds on this issue in the last fifteen years were not swayed by haranguing them into recognizing their evil intentions. They were swayed by the simple expedient of seeing that homosexual couples were just normal people asking for equality in treatment. Actually, it was both things. A significant amount of the progress in gay rights is due to simple visibility. But also very important to the rapid progress of the movement was successfully identifying homophobia as a species of bigotry in the public consciousness, and linking that bigotry to similar discrimination against racial and religious groups - which is to say, getting people to recognize homophobia as an evil in and of itself. And I can easily find you a dozen testimony from self-described former homophobes who explicitly describe their former position as hateful, bigoted, immoral, and evil. I know I can find them, because I did it the last time you started in on this bullshit. > [@](#): > > :rolleyes: > I have argued for SSM for a very long time, with friends, family, business associates, and the occasional stranger on the street. I simply note that it is an error to assume that all opposition is based in evil motives. I don’t think that either side is evil–although both sides include some evil participants. I think that one side is wrong; I just do not see the point of falsely portraying them as universally evil. > > _::: shrug :::_ All opposition to gay rights is based in evil motives. This is not the same thing as saying that a person who is homophobic is entirely - or even mostly - evil. People are more complex than that. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/159 "2014-11-19T17:29:15Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I replied to the caliber of your “argument” in the manner appropriate. Really–so you call us self-righteous and gloss over actually **making an argument** , just declaring outright that it’s not necessarily bigotry, but when someone points out that you’re being far more self-righteous than the objects of your insult, THAT is the bad argument? Okey dokey. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2014, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764/160 "2014-11-19T17:30:32Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I replied to the caliber of your “argument” in the manner appropriate. Don’t sneer at your betters. It’s unbecoming. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-argument-against-separate-but-equal-civil-unions/704764.md?page=9)