Why not change the words from gay marriage to civil union?

They call it domestic partnership here....

Most gays do not care what it is called as long as those marriage rights are included and recognized.

Kimberly, they have domestic partnership here in Fla too, but it doesn't include marriage rights.

I agree 100 percent. I am not a Christian but can see the controversy when it is called "marriage" as a marriage was invented and defined in the bible.
Not sure why they cant just figure this out and let EVERY ONE be happy and in love.

a win win situation? Hardly- it only works if your objective is to keep marriage between a man and a woman. The point is to open marriage for everyone. why those that want to keep it between a man and a women are so against everyone having the option to marry it I don't know-

sounds so much like statements I've heard so often "I am completely supportive of others as long as they do what I want"
sounds like you want to keep marriage closed to anyone that you think should not have that right.
Open your eyes please-

This question was asked a few months ago and the poster was slammed left and right and called a bigot for even suggestion it. Let's see if a few months have changed the mind of a few.

I never get this argument. It's like saying straight people can have dogs and we'll call them dogs, and gay people can also have dogs, but they need to call theirs 'barkers.' Is it the name that people object to, or the union itself? It's okay for gays to partner up for life in a legally recognized union so long as we don't use the 'm' work to describe it?

Fine, if that is what it takes to get equal rights for all, that's fine. Let the churches/religious institutions have holy matrimony, let the gov't handle civil unions for all genders, and colloquially call them all marriages. But it's still calling a dog a 'barker', IMO, and that seems unnecessary when we can all see it's a dog!

because allowing gay people to have equal rights will deminish the "sanctity" of marriage
oh wait, Brittney Spears already did that...

I never get this argument. It's like saying straight people can have dogs and we'll call them dogs, and gay people can also have dogs, but they need to call theirs 'barkers.' Is it the name that people object to, or the union itself?

No everyone who gets married by the state has a civil union, its Matrimony or a sacrament in many churches so there is already a name difference. But I agree, if that is what it takes, then allow it to happen and write your reps for a name change.

We would have even more divorces then