From the state's pt of view, isn't marriage really just a civil union?

Question

I'm trying to understand the difference between a civil union and a marriage in reference to state rights.

Like, next of kin rights, automatic beneficiary rights, etc...

I understand a marriage is a sacred oath by the church but am asking is there a difference in rights?

" N.J.: Same-sex unions OK; marriage out of the question"
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/21/samesex.unions.ap/index.html?eref=rss_politics

Is it just a terminology difference concerning states?

Btw, I know there is a difference at the federal level:
"They won't, however, be entitled to the same benefits as married couples in the eyes of the federal government because of 1996 law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Gay partners won't be able to collect deceased partners' Social Security benefits, for example, said family lawyer Felice T. Londa, who represents many same-sex couples."

Answer 1

Marriage began as a religious sacrament. Where the government went wrong was in adopting the word marriage for the license. I would propose that all couples receive a "certificate of civil union." If they are to be married, then that will be performed by their church and the church can issue a marriage certificate if they wish to. As far as the state is concerned, the couples are all equal under the law and can have any ceremony they want, performed by a person legally eligible to join them either through a civil or religious ceremony.

Answer 2

Some states define civil unions with fewer rights than true marriage. Depending on the state, the "civil union" may be a limited form of marriage. In most cases, however, there are no differences at the state level.

The main difference is the symbolism around the word "marriage." Since marriage has been traditionally defined as a union between a man and woman, the word would need to be redefined to permit other combinations of partners. Many people are personally opposed to this redefinition of the word even though there is no real legal significance to this argument.

Answer 3

I'm perplexed by that too. It says that gay couples in NJ would get adoption rights, own a house together, inherit wills, and other legal things that married straight couples have. I really don't see the difference between gay marriage or civil unions. They are giving them the same rights and under the eyes of the law they are married. Some people would say marriage is in the church and sacred but many gays are still getting married, they're just not calling it that. I think the word civil union is an appeasement to the conservatives so they would not oppose civil unions. It is all a trick of the word and replacing one word with another. But in the end is still marriage no matter what you call it.

Answer 4

The answer is no, it is not the same. Marriage is not a sacred oath by the church. Anyone licensed by the state can marry a couple. And yes a gay couple is denied certain legal rights brought about by a "legally" recognized marriage. A civil union denies the right to a hospital visit, jail visits, decision making, insurance coverage, will making, and several other things because with a civil union they are not RELATED by marriage, as a legally recognized marriage would do.

Answer 5

I'm glad you brought this up, and I know this subject is likely important to you.
The difference between a civil union and a marriage is a ball and chain.
This debate over gay marriage is pretty silly. I can't understand why a same sex couple would want or need the same binding ties as heterosexual couples.
People romanticize marriage, which most likely was created to stop irresponsible men from abandoning the mother of their children. Marriage laws are primarily codes enacted to offer protection to women and their children.
Now, if gays want to have that type of bond between one another, I say go for it. But personally, I don't see why you would want to commit half of your own success in life to another person simply out of the need for companionship. People are so unpredictable, and feelings can change unexpectedly.

Answer 6

One problem with a gay couple only being allowed to be "Civil Unioned" is when they travel outside of the country. If a gay couple is in another country and one of them is hospitalized the other has no way of visiting. A foreign country is not going to recognize the fact that the couple is "unioned". Therefore their rights, as they would stand for a married couple, are gone.

Answer 7

all marriages are civil unions as far as the sate is concerned, some times they are conducted in a church and by clergy
Politicians are elected by people , people are non logical and confused, in order to placate both sides of the argument they have a compromise of civil unions. A civil union will be a marriage for homosexuals.

Answer 8

I think basically if you dress up a sows ear to look like a silk purse it's still just a sows ear. In other words if they package it and tie it up in a neat bow and call it a civil union more people are happy with it because the word marriage isn't involved.

Answer 9

BeachBum- I like your questions and information.

Marriage and a civil union certainly should be the same thing. It's just that you mix religion with it, and the old book says to stone gay people. since we're not allowed to kill gay people any more, I guess, in gods name, we should restrict their rights. Somehow this makes sense to the religious mind.

Answer 10

Marriage is between man & woman. It has been since before the Bible.
Civil Union is just like some kind of legal contract or agreement.
Democrats will change that.
They will first gain civil unions, and then turn it into full marriage.