• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Civil Unions: Separate and Unequal

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
Article

What is Marriage
? When people marry, they tend to do so for reasons of love and commitment. But marriage is also a legal status, which comes with rights and responsibilities. Marriage establishes a legal kinship between you and your spouse. It is a relationship that is recognized across cultures, countries and religions.

What is a Civil Union? Civil Unions exist in only two places: Vermont and Connecticut. In 2005 California created a domestic partnership law that offers many of the same rights as civil unions. Vermont civil unions were created in 2000 to provide legal protections to gays and lesbians in relationships in that state because gay marriage is not an option. The protections do not extend beyond the border of Vermont and no federal protections are included with a Civil Union. Civil Unions offer some of the same rights and responsibilities as marriage, but only on a state level.

What are some of the differences between Civil Unions and Gay Marriage?


Recognition in other states: Even though each state has its own laws around marriage, if someone is married in one state and moves to another, their marriage is legally recognized. For example, Oregon marriage law applies to people 17 and over. In Washington state, the couple must be 18 to wed. However, Washington will recognize the marriage of two 17 year olds from Oregon who move there. This is not the case with Civil Unions. If someone has a Civil Union in Vermont, that union is not recognized in any other state. As a matter of fact, two states, Connecticut and Georgia, have ruled that they do not have to recognize civil unions performed in Vermont, because their states have no such legal category. As gay marriages become legal in other states, this status may change.


Dissolving a Civil Union v. Divorce:
Vermont has no residency requirement for Civil Unions. That means two people from any other state or country can come there and have a civil union ceremony. If the couple breaks up and wishes to dissolve the union, one of them must be a resident of Vermont for one year before the Civil Union can be dissolved in family court. Married couples can divorce in any state they reside, no matter where they were married.


Immigration:
A United States citizen who is married can sponsor his or her non-American spouse for immigration into this country. Those with Civil Unions have no such privilege.


Taxes:
Civil Unions are not recognized by the federal government, so couples would not be able to file joint-tax returns or be eligible for tax breaks or protections the government affords to married couples.


Benefits:
The General Accounting Office in 1997 released a list of 1,049 benefits and protections available to heterosexual married couples. These benefits range from federal benefits, such as survivor benefits through Social Security, sick leave to care for ailing partner, tax breaks, veterans benefits and insurance breaks. They also include things like family discounts, obtaining family insurance through your employer, visiting your spouse in the hospital and making medical decisions if your partner is unable to. Civil Unions protect some of these rights, but not all of them.


But can’t a lawyer set all this up for gay and lesbian couples?
No. A lawyer can set up some things like durable power of attorney, wills and medical power of attorney. There are several problems with this, however.

1. It costs thousands of dollars in legal fees. A simple marriage license, which usually costs under $100 would cover all the same rights and benefits.

2. Any of these can be challenged in court. As a matter of fact, more wills are challenged than not. In the case of wills, legal spouses always have more legal power than any other family member.

3. Marriage laws are universal. If someone’s husband or wife is injured in an accident, all you need to do is show up and say you’re his or her spouse. You will not be questioned. If you show up at the hospital with your legal paperwork, the employees may not know what to do with you. If you simply say, "He's my husband," you will immediately be taken to your spouse's side.

Even with lesbian and gay marriages being performed and recognized in some states, the Federal Defense of Marriage Law prohibits the federal government from recognizing gay and lesbian relationships. This puts gay and lesbian couples who are married in a legal limbo. How do they file their tax returns? Do they have to pay the tax on their partner’s health insurance? How do they fill out legal and other forms, single or married?


Creating Civil Unions creates a separate and unequal status for some of America’s citizens. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial court ruled that creating a separate class for gay and lesbian citizens is not permissible and that is why they have voted that only marriage equals marriage.

The precedent was set with Brown v. The Board of Education regarding segregation in public education. Ironically, Massachusetts marriage law went into effect on the 50th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education.

The United States Constitution guarantees equality for all. As you can see, marriage and civil unions are not the same. Creating equal access to marriage is the only fair way to ensure equality for gay and straight couples alike.
 

GloriaPatri

Active Member
You cited Vermont as an example. Well, in Vermont those who get civil unions have the same legal rights (minus federal benefits) as those who get married. The only problem is making this uniform across the country.

If it is made uniform throughout the country I see no problem with civil unions. It is nothing like Brown vs. The Board of Ed. You are not setting up a seperate class for gay and lesbians - theoretically anyone can get a civil union. In fact, I would think that many people would prefer a civil union over a marriage.
 

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
GloriaPatri said:
You cited Vermont as an example. Well, in Vermont those who get civil unions have the same legal rights (minus federal benefits) as those who get married. The only problem is making this uniform across the country.

If it is made uniform throughout the country I see no problem with civil unions. It is nothing like Brown vs. The Board of Ed. You are not setting up a seperate class for gay and lesbians - theoretically anyone can get a civil union. In fact, I would think that many people would prefer a civil union over a marriage.

The fact that civil unions do not grant federal marriage benefits is the problem! Even if every state allowed gays and lesbians to have civil unions there would still be over 1100 federal rights we would be denied because the federal government does not recognize civil unions of anyone - gay or straight - only civil marriages.
 

GloriaPatri

Active Member
Maize said:

The fact that civil unions do not grant federal marriage benefits is the problem! Even if every state allowed gays and lesbians to have civil unions there would still be over 1100 federal rights we would be denied because the federal government does not recognize civil unions of anyone - gay or straight - only civil marriages.

Yes, I know. Which is why I said it should be made uniform across the country.
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
How sad, Maize. I didn't realize that civil unions were so restrictive. You obviously have a way to go, to get equality.
icon9.gif
 

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
GloriaPatri said:
Yes, I know. Which is why I said it should be made uniform across the country.

If civil union is going to be equal to civil marriage in all legal aspects on both the state and federal level, why the two different names? It seems rather redundant.

People need to recognize the difference in civil marriage (the legal part) and religious marriage (which is optional in the eyes of the law).
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
If civil unions were marriage by another name, then I would be prepared to compromise on this issue and allow marriages for heterosexual couples only, and civil unions for homosexual couples only. After all, what's in a name if the rights and processes are identical. But the OP makes clear that the two are not identical, and I am in no mood to compromise until homosexuals have exactly the same rights and proceedures as heterosexuals. Anything less is an abridgement of equality. An unnecessary and irrational abridgement, IMO, since I can find no legitimate reason(s) for it.
 

GloriaPatri

Active Member
Maize said:

If civil union is going to be equal to civil marriage in all legal aspects on both the state and federal level, why the two different names? It seems rather redundant. People need to recognize the difference in civil marriage (the legal part) and religious marriage (which is optional in the eyes of the law).

Because marriage has a religious connotation. If I get married I would like to be married by the Roman Catholic Church and have that recognized by the government because in my eyes marriage constitutes something more than just benefits I get from the state and federal governments.
 

Jaymes

The cake is a lie
GloriaPatri said:
Because marriage has a religious connotation.
That doesn't mean that it's only religious or that only certain religions should have control of who is allowed to marry who they love.
 

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
GloriaPatri said:
Because marriage has a religious connotation.
Not to the Atheist, or the Taoist, or the Buddhist, etc... yet, they have no problem when they go to get a marriage license as long as they are heterosexual.

Yes, to some marriage has a religious connotation, but not to all and it certainly shouldn't in the eyes of the law of a secular government.

because in my eyes marriage constitutes something more than just benefits I get from the state and federal governments.

It does to us as well. It symbolizes the love and commitment made to another person, standing in front of friends and family, making an affirmation and vow to love, honor and cherish this person forever. This is why many same sex couples already have Marriage ceremonies, we just don't get the legal rights and benefits that go with it that heterosexuals take for granted. Rights and benefits that would help us protect the one we love and our families.

We get married for the same reasons you do.
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
GloriaPatri said:
Because marriage has a religious connotation. If I get married I would like to be married by the Roman Catholic Church and have that recognized by the government because in my eyes marriage constitutes something more than just benefits I get from the state and federal governments.

In England, you can get married at a registry office (ie out of Church, a civil union conducted by a civil servant who has the power to marry you). The ceremony is still called a marriage, although there is no trace of Religiosity in the union.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
GloriaPatri said:
Because marriage has a religious connotation.

But marriage doesn't necessarily have a religious connotation, does it? Especially in light of the fact that every culture and society known to history has had some variation of marriage. The human desire to pair bond seems instinctive, rather than invented and patented by religion.
 

GloriaPatri

Active Member
Sunstone said:
But marriage doesn't necessarily have a religious connotation, does it? Especially in light of the fact that every culture and society known to history has had some variation of marriage. The human desire to pair bond seems instinctive, rather than invented and patented by religion.

Yeah, that's true.

But, in Western society it has, historically, had a religious connotation.
 

Jaymes

The cake is a lie
GloriaPatri said:
But, in Western society it has, historically, had a religious connotation.
How does this justify telling gays, lesbians, transgendered couples, or anyone "No, you don't deserve the 1000+ rights civil marriage grants"?
 

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
GloriaPatri said:
But, in Western society it has, historically, had a religious connotation.
I don't think it's as historic as you may think, but still it doesn't address the issue at hand which is gay and lesbian couples are denied equal legal rights and that civil unions as they are defined now will not rectify that.
 

GloriaPatri

Active Member
Jensa said:
How does this justify telling gays, lesbians, transgendered couples, or anyone "No, you don't deserve the 1000+ rights civil marriage grants"?

I never said that. If you read over my posts you would know that I support civil unions that give the same rights that married couples have.
 

standing_alone

Well-Known Member
GloriaPatri said:
Yeah, that's true.

But, in Western society it has, historically, had a religious connotation.

Religious connotation or not, it's still no reason to deny same-sex couples the right to marry in a secular nation-state.
 

GloriaPatri

Active Member
Maize said:
I don't think it's as historic as you may think, but still it doesn't address the issue at hand which is gay and lesbian couples are denied equal legal rights and that civil unions as they are defined now will not rectify that.

Yes, I agree. People who enter into civil unions should be afforded the same rights.
 

standing_alone

Well-Known Member
GloriaPatri said:
I never said that. If you read over my posts you would know that I support civil unions that give the same rights that married couples have.

Civil unions don't give the same rights that marriages do. Civil unions only give the rights granted by the state in which the civil union is made. A civil union is only recognized in the state in which it's made. Marriage is recognized in every state and by the federal government.
 

GloriaPatri

Active Member
standing_alone said:
Religious connotation or not, it's still no reason to deny same-sex couples the right to marry in a secular nation-state.

Same-sex couples can have as many civil unions as they like. I don't care what they do.
 
Top