Here in the UK, it's possible to gain residency based on an unmarried partnership whether that's opposite or same sex partnership, a civil partnership of two people of the same sex, or a marriage between two people of the opposite sex. Do you think that US citizens and LPR's should have the same rights?

Absolutely. Marriage is not the only way of making a life long commitment to someone.

I am thinking of how dangerous it would be in some countries to make that sort of application. To admit to being gay could be life threatening

I believe that any committed couple should be allowed to marry, and that any married couple, and no unmarried couple, should be allowed to petition for USCIS benefits. If you want the legal benefits of marriage, you should have to get married.

People who don't believe in marriage piss me off, and they piss me off even more when they say they don't believe in marriage but want all the legal benefits thereof. Hello, what do you think marriage *is*? It's a formal, legal contract to change your legal next-of-kin from your parent or sibling to an unrelated person (your spouse); it's really not much different than an adoption contract. If you want the other person to be your next-of-kin permanently, and be able to make legal decisions for you and so on, get married. If you don't want to get married, then don't expect the benefits of marriage.

Which is why I am completely in favor of legalization of same-sex marriage.

yes....

Two word answer to that - 'Of course!'

but why not? How would you like it if someone decided that you couldn't petition for your spouse based on your chosen religion?

Homosexuality is not a choice, religion is.

I think no for the first one, the reason being is that a scam where both parts agree to marry so the other can have a green card would be way easier if they didn't have to go through all the legal and financial aspects of a marriage.
It would make things easier for illegal immigration.

Yes for the second one if they get married.

Yes, yes, yes.
In Canada, common-law spouses can petition; and so can same sex couples. I think that is pretty nice and gives all the same rights. We both think you don't have to be married to be devoted and committed to someone else. Not by a long shot.

What legal benefits?

Well, in the case of this poll, being able to bring their partner to the US as an immediate-family immigrant.

Also, health insurance, tax benefits, the right to make medical decisions ... those are just off the top of my head. I know if you look at right-to-marriage websites, you can find a complete list ... I believe there are something like two hundred and twelve legal benefits to marriage that unmarried partners don't have.

I think people who *can't* get married should be able to. I think people who *could* get married but choose not to, should not get any of the legal benefits of marriage.

Oh and I meant to add ... if the US were to totally revamp the process by which two consenting adults make a formal commitment to become each other's life partners and next of kin, such that all the legal benefits were conferred by "registering a civil union" and the word "marriage" were used only for religious ceremonies and meant only that the church considered you a permanent couple, then I'd say that any two committed adults should be allowed to register a civil union, and that only those who'd registered a civil union should be allowed to petition to bring their partner to the US as an immediate family member.

In other words, I'm not hung up on the semantics; I use the word "marriage" only because that's what it's currently called legally. I just see it as, either the person is the one who you want to permanently and legally designate as your closest family member, or s/he's not. If you do, get married. If you don't, don't expect to be treated like you had.

In the UK civil partnerships are only for same-sex couples. My OH really doesn't like all of the bumph that comes along with a lot of cultural perceptions of what a 'married couple' is supposed to be. He saw the civil partnership stuff and wanted to do that. I had to explain that we weren't allowed to.

In response to the question - both of us say no

Hey Jamie! good to see you again!

Hi there! Thanks!

I think the crux of my view on the matter is, there should be one process that should be open to everyone; and you should have to go through that process before you get any of the legal rights currently associated with marriage.

What that process is called, I couldn't care less about.