I urge Democrats to be against gay marriage.
I used to support the notion of civil unions, but once I realized that they were a stalking horse for those trying to change the definition of marriage, I became opposed to those too.
Now, comes another reason from France to be against civil unions:
Some are divorced and disenchanted with marriage; others are young couples ideologically opposed to marriage, but eager to lighten their tax burdens. Many are lovers not quite ready for old-fashioned matrimony.
...their reasons, and they vary widely, French couples are increasingly shunning traditional marriages and opting instead for civil unions, to the point that there are now two civil unions for every three marriages.
When France created its system of civil unions in 1999, it was heralded as a revolution in gay rights, a relationship almost like marriage, but not quite. No one, though, anticipated how many couples would make use of the new law. Nor was it predicted that by 2009, the overwhelming majority of civil unions would be between straight couples.
They are replacing marriage, and making it easier to weaken the notion and effectiveness of marriage.
Here's the thing to worry about:
It remains unclear whether the idea of a civil union, called a pacte civil de solidarité, or PACS, has responded to a shift in social attitudes or caused one. But it has proved remarkably well suited to France and its particularities about marriage, divorce, religion and taxes — and it can be dissolved with just a registered letter.
This article is the answer as to why the institution of marriage gets weaker and how it hurts me or other normal people when you change the definition.