civil unions have become very popular among democratic presidential
candidates. Civil unions enable candidates (like John Edwards in
the last debate) to say I things like gays should have rights but I
believe marriage is between a man and a woman. Candidates have
found civil unions to be a safer middle ground.
I realize that the climb to full equality is a process. But civil
unions just don’t cut it for me. Greta Christina sums it up
perfectly in her blog, stating:
There are legal reasons why they’re not equal —
marriage is recognized in every state and indeed every country,
while civil unions aren’t; so the rights and responsibilities don’t
necessarily travel with you when you leave the state that granted
them. There are emotional reasons — marriage is an institution/
ritual/ relationship that has existed for thousands of years, one
that has tremendous resonance in our culture in a way that civil
unions simply don’t. And there are moral reasons — as history has
born out, separate but equal is pretty much by definition not
equal.
Above all, marriage is the only currency of commitment that this
country understands. I immediately think to hospital visitation
rights. Would you trust a nurse or hospital administrator to
interpret the rights that a civil union bestows? What about
employers? According to Garden State equality, the equality
organization for the state of New Jersey (where civil unions are
the law),
1 out of 7 civil unioned couples is being denied partner benefits
by employers.
The fact is, civil unions are unequal in every sense. I would like
to think that history has taught us that separate is never
equal.
But we’re making strides. Same-sex couples from Rhode Island who
are married in Massachusetts are being recognized, and now
New Mexico has followed suit. Yes, it’s a long climb to
equality, but civil unions are not a rung in that ladder.