The dialogue began in the post at RK consisting of Doug Denneny liveblogging on Sun. Nov. 25. My question about maintaining the civil union option even if same-sex marriage were legalized came too late for the liveblog. Lowell and another commenter opined that Doug was not only pro-same-sex marriage but wanted to be even more liberal. I was skeptical; so, I e-mailed Doug at his campaign site. Below is his reply.
"Joel, Sorry I missed your question. That is exactly what I meant. A choice. Some couples may not want to be called "married" or perform a religious ceremony because they are agnostic. Bottom line, I want marriage legal rights/benefits for all, regardless of sexual orientation. Thx for the question, Doug"
In my opinion, the debate in recent years has centered on same-sex marriage. Civil unions have been proposed as a compromise measure. There may never have been that many agnostic couples who would object to the term "marriage" even when imposed in a legal civil ceremony. Perhaps it's just the way things are that anti-same-sex marriage people feel more free to claim that allowing same-sex marriage somehow dilutes the term "marriage." There may be non-religious types out there who wish their marriages could be called something without religious connotations, but, with atheism still being a fairly taboo subject, they just haven't felt empowered to organize and speak out.
In the end, even if Doug's campaign advances and he gets to discuss this issue the focus will be on the same-sex marriage part and not civil unions for all. So, this is probably an academic debate only.