As  a gay male in a long-term relationship, I was dismayed today when North  Carolina voters approved Amendment 1 which banned civil unions and  domestic partnerships. That amendment also defined marriage as between 1  man and 1 woman, which was already in state law.

The  issue here in the US of A of what to do about same-gender relationships  and legal status involving equal rights and benefits is one which I do  believe is up to each individual state to decide. Each state must  determine whether to allow marriage, civil union, domestic partnership  or to reject any or all 3.

Historically,  marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman and was  based on societal/politcal reasons. Marriage was used to increase  landholdings, end disputes and wars or to join families together to  increase influence. In time, it also became a religious ceremony and  invoked blessing by the diety of the male's family.

The  state or government, however, was not really involved at that time.  During the feudal ages, government became the primary grantor of  permission to marry. Religious organizations always played secondary and  not primary until recent times.

During  feudalism, the lord of the manor had to give permission for the  peasants to marry. Or in the case of the nobility, it was the king or a  member higher on the nobility rankings that the nobleman/lord seeking to  wed had to receive license or permission. Often during this time  marriages were strictly for political gain.

Then  something happened in the late 19th Century. Love became a reason to  marry. During all this time in the annals of history there were  same-gender couples, but the issue of equal rights and benefits under  law had never been a factor.

In  our world today, it is not the blessing of the church that sanctifies  the joining of two individuals who choose to live life together, but  rather in the US of A, one goes to the county clerk's office to receive a  license to marry. Government provides recognition of long-term  relationships.

The  biggest hang up I see is not in most states with 50% of Americans, in  the latest Gallup Poll, whether to allow same-gender couples equal  rights and benefits under law. Rather the hang up has to do with using  one word - marriage.

When  the question is posed only about equal rights and benefits at least  half of all Americans are in favor of granting those rights and  benefits. But when the word, marriage, is included...that number drops.

I  do believe that all Americans should stand equal in the eyes of the  law. Whether same-gender or opposite gender couples, both should should  not be seen as unequal in any legal sense.

Letting  the issue rest on one word, to me is ridiculous. What the state decides  to put on a license is not as important as being seen equally under the  law.

I  long for the day that both same-gender and opposite gender couples can  be recognized legally by every state with the same rights and benefits

For  me and my partner, Iohn, we only want the security of having our  relationship recognized as legal and equal in the sight of the law. It  matters not what the license is for - marriage, civil union, domestic  partnership. The terminology is irrelevant.

Let  opposite gender couples receive a license to marry. Let same-gender  couples receive a license of civil union. Or let all couples recieve  only a license of civil union.

When the state is involved let the license of recognition take place in a ceremony with a  public official.

Let any of the couples who want a religious ceremony go to their  religious organization and abide by the beliefs of that religion. But do  not abridge in any way the right of any religious organization to not  allow for a ceremony if that goes against that religion's beliefs.

State sanctioned or licensing should have no basis in relgion or morality, but be neutral.

From  the Cornfield, Iohn and I don't care what you call our license of legal  recognition of our relationship...just let us be seen equal under the  law with any and all rights and benefits afforded long-term  relationships recognized by the state.