Civil unions for different-sex couples
If civil union or something like it were available to you, would you do it? Would you be excited, or shrug? What level of couple registration and rights would satisfy your desire for an alternative to marriage, or are you looking for something completely different? The LGBT community has debated whether to settle for civil union or keep demanding legal recognition for same-sex marriage. Where do different-sex couples and others fit in?
In France, different-sex couples get civil unions at the rate of two for every three marriages. They are quite different from marriage. In Illinois, different-sex partners will soon be eligible for civil union, which will be quite similar to marriage under state law. In eight other states, different-sex couples have access to varying levels of statewide registry and rights. AtMP supporter Mary Ann Vorasky is campaigning to create civil unions that are legally equivalent to marriage nationwide.
AtMP’s board-approved strategy is that marriage-equivalent civil unions are nice but not enough. We don’t want to simply re-name marriage, we want to reconsider the rights and responsibilities now associated with married couples. Some should be eliminated altogether; many should be expanded to cover other forms of adult interdependent relationships.
December 17th, 2010 at 8:40 pm
I’d be open to a civil union. Seems to have most of the legal/financial benefits of marriage with a much easier solution for dissolve, if need be. As one half of a different sex, committed couple, it would be enough for me. The word marriage still gives me that allergic reaction feeling in regards to the religious implications it still carries. A civil union doesn’t seem to hold so much idealism for til-death-do-you-part, etc.; feels more realistic, practical, and honest to me.
January 6th, 2011 at 1:43 am
I don’t believe in marriage. I don’t want to marry. I don’t like it’s roots nor history. I don’t like it’s price tag, and I don’t like the way married people look down upon others as if they are certified experts on successful relationships. I have been with my boyfriend for almost seven years, and I don’t want to buy into marriage and have it shape my identity over the years in a way that I avoid. However, my boyfriend is not living in the U.S. legally. With that said, he cannot visit his family and does not have many opportunities that others have. I can’t think of any other alternatives, and am saddened (yes, saddened) to say that I’ll have to marry him in order for us to both to have access to the same basic rights. I feel that in my case, other alternatives should be accessible. In fact, I wish I could get some advice. I probably sound selfish having admitted to not marrying him, but I really don’t like marriage as an institution and hate the fact that I have to buy into it.
January 6th, 2011 at 12:10 pm
A lot of people are in your situation, Elle. Whether it’s having to marry for health insurance or for immigration or even to be posted in the same village as Peace Corps workers, many couples feel forced to compromise their values in order to access resources that really should be available to all people in committed relationships. AtMP is dedicated to changing laws and policies like these. Meanwhile, some couples find it helpful to design special ceremonies that fully reflect their values and endow their marriage license with uniquely personal meaning. Best wishes for your relationship together!
January 7th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
I agree with the previous comment’s, I dislike the entire concept of marriage and it really irritates me that everyone expects you to get married. I do want a committed relationship and feel that I have the beginnings of one with my current boy-friend, and if and when the time ever comes when we might need some legal paper allowing us to have the same rights as married folk, I would definitely think about a civil union.
January 7th, 2011 at 4:17 pm
I hear and agree with all the comments. I am in an “Unmarried to Each Other” relationship, (different sex). In my case, we did marry, but found out later that I would loose my late husbands pension. So we had the marriage annulled. And now his family is not so close to me anymore. So the state government in essence forces you to not to marry. A civil union would be great!
January 7th, 2011 at 5:52 pm
I can’t wait for different sex civil unions to be legal across the US. It would be nice to have some rights and bring more awareness to issues with marriage many of us have.
I was recently listening to Steven Pinker on a science podcast discussing language and he mentioned how in the English language there is no word to immediately convey our types of relationships. There are pretty much three words to choose from and none of them are sufficient: girl/boyfriend (which comes with less respect), partner (which is generally associated with gay couples), and husband/wife (which is exactly what we are not). For my part, I go with partner (which does tend to make people think I’m gay or hurt they’re heads trying to figure it out, neither of which bother me).
At any rate, I think that ultimately allowing same sex civil unions will give us our word. This will give these relationships the legal and social context necessary for them to be understood by the general public.
January 7th, 2011 at 6:08 pm
When the founders of AtMP were doing their initial research, they found about 10 terms that people use, with partner definitely most popular. http://www.unmarried.org/unmarried-introductions.html
January 7th, 2011 at 7:06 pm
Since Marriage – as it stands today – is a religious ceremony only, there is no reason for there to be a difference between paying several thousand to have a Minister say the words or walking in and having a judge sign the contract.
Both should be registered the same way – Husband and Wife sign and agreement and send it to the courthouse.
The big difference should be the pre-nups. Since this is the main source of divorce lawyers, a simple agreement while you still like each other would save time and money when you call it quits (by again signing an agreement and sending it to the courthouse). Of course, we just eliminated the ENTIRE Marriage Industry Income so it’s not likely to happen, is it?
January 7th, 2011 at 7:14 pm
Do we know why the Government took away our rights to Civil Unions in the 80s in favor of Religious commitment to start with?
There are now so many things in this country – insurance, visitation, medical say, taxes, soc sec, pensions, debts even child support – that are tied to your marital status (either pro or con) – and all of that comes with the requirement to pay the church to officiate at the permissoin to co-habitat with the person/s of your choice.
Elle – what kind of advice are you looking for?
Is there a reason your SO cannot apply for citizenship?
leaving you both free to make your choices with your heart rather than with your pocketbook?
January 10th, 2011 at 11:13 pm
I would not be interested in any sort of union that involves the government. Tax policy should be changed so that everyone pays based on their own income, period. I *would* be interested in a legal ability to designate one or more other persons to have certain connections with me for things such as hospital visitation, though a health care proxy covers a lot of that.
Note to Terry: Churches are not your problem. You can get married without involving a church. Civil marriage – an implied contract with the government as one of the parties – is the problem.
May 3rd, 2011 at 7:07 pm
My different-sex partner and I live in NJ. What happens if we go to Chicago in June and get a civi union? Would NJ have to give us the same rights? NJ does have civil-unions (for same-sex couples and diff-sex couples over 62). Anyone else want try this?