An Interesting Discussion on Same-Sex Marriage

     I follow an account on Twitter, @homophobes. They re-tweet offensive statements about gays. I read one such tweet about same-sex marriage that didn't seem as offensive as most others. This girl's statement was that she didn't think same sex couples should get married in religious institutions, and that she knew that she could only speak for herself. I responded to her with a question about whether she was ok with legal civil unions, to which she said she was fine. Had I really meet someone on the internet who understood "separation of church and state"?! I thanked her for indulging me, and thought the interaction was over.
     Several weeks later, I get a message from a gentleman challenging me that "civil unions are not marriages." We continued to go back and forth for multiple days trying to express or views. I was increasingly frustrated by Twitter's 140 character limit. We were sending two- and three-part messages debating the difference between "unions" and "marriages". Eventually, I had to put the conversation on hold. I was screaming at a person I didn't know, and couldn't even see. Our common language was preventing us from communicating clearly. This post is, hopefully, going to help.
     The loudest, most frequent argument against same-sex marriage is that the Bible says it's wrong. I've read some interesting views regarding homosexuality and religion, but let's table that for now. People argue that "marriage" is a religious institution. Nowadays, straight couples get married in a church, and it also creates a legal bond.. I may be wrong, but it's my understanding that this stems from the days when governments were irrevocably tired to the Church. I have spoken to people who do not object to same-sex couples having the same legal rights of marriage, as long as their church didn't have to perform the services.
     In my previous encounter, back in October, I used the word "union" to describe the legal status. I was relying on the concept of " multiple made one" with the intent that it would include ANY couple. I wanted to take religion out of the conversation, and discuss the idea as a legal concept, rather than a religious one. When I was married, we went to the courthouse, because we didn't want to be wed in a church we didn't believe in. As such, I considered marriage" to be a "legal union".
     Just because I used to be married to a man doesn't mean I am not fully invested in this fight. My next love may just as easily be a woman. My roommates are all men who prefer the company of other men. What happens when they want the same advantages I used to have? My aunt was denied access to her wife's bedside after surgery, because their relationship had no legal standing.
     I honestly believe my country would be well served to use a different term than "marriage" for any couple. This would remove the risk of trying to create a separate but equal situation, which history shows is not truly equal.
     If the gentleman from Twitter reads this, I hope you can see that we really do want the same thing. We were just stumbling over a misunderstanding of vocabulary. I was trying to avoid the word "marriage" because of its religious undertones. You are fighting FOR the same word because of its place in the common lexicon. I know I have difficulty expressing complex thoughts without getting confusing. Does this do any good at trying to explain my viewpoint any better?