I've heard the "civil unions for all" idea tossed around in several circles, sometimes for the reasons you described, sometimes just to shut all the complainers up. I think it's a great idea with three complications:
1) The transition period is going to be PAINFUL.
2) Marriage law is state-based, so either all 50 states have to be on-board for it or the Supreme Court has to step in and make a ruling like the one you described.
3) The Supreme Court already stepped in on the subject of marriage in Loving v. Virginia (interracial marriage) and declared it a fundamental right. They'd likely either have to overrule that statement or say "civil unions cover the same thing" before this plan would be possible.
no subject
1) The transition period is going to be PAINFUL.
2) Marriage law is state-based, so either all 50 states have to be on-board for it or the Supreme Court has to step in and make a ruling like the one you described.
3) The Supreme Court already stepped in on the subject of marriage in Loving v. Virginia (interracial marriage) and declared it a fundamental right. They'd likely either have to overrule that statement or say "civil unions cover the same thing" before this plan would be possible.
As for the "fruit" comment... :P