The semantic argument, civil-union vs. marriage, is the last hiding place of the anti-gay bigots. Let’s not kid ourselves. Santorum would like gay sex to be banned, other candidates would like to see Gays expelled from the military, others still would like Gays to be “cured” of their homosexuality. To pretend they’re concerned with the name of a legal contract is only the most recent way of pandering to the marginalization of the LGBT community.
When women received the right to VOTE, society changed the superficial meaning of the word VOTE. For millenia, from the first democracies in Greece, only MEN were allowed to VOTE. And yet, by allowing blacks or women to vote, we didn’t change the true meaning of the word, voting stayed the same, the only change was that suddenly another sector of the population could also participate.
When women were finally allowed to become LAWYERS and JUDGES, we didn’t change the definition of those words, we simply accepted that gender was not the factor that determined one’s ability to participate in either of those professions.
Marriage is a civil contract that gives two citizens certain rights. The main point of that contract isn’t who can sign it, it’s the rights and obligations said contract gives to those who subscribe to it. It’s odd that in this day and age there are still people capable of presenting this absurd semantic argument with a straight face.