In what ways do "CIVIL UNIONS" discriminate against same-sex couples in ways "MARRIAGE" (if allowed) wouldn't?

Question

(This question is relevant to R&S because much of the opposition to same-sex marriage has been launched from religious institutions, even though marriage is allowed for different-sex couples, regardless of their religious affiliation. Some religious people have stated that they would allow "civil unions" but not "marriage.")

Answer 1

Do a search on 'separate but equal' and supreme court rulings.

Answer 2

I think by allowing civil unions it makes it more difficult for the state to prevent same-sex marriages, because then you do start getting into the seperate but equal arguments and the discrimination. I think they either need to allow gay marriage or they don't. Marriage is not a fundamental Constitutional right nor is there a protected class involved, therefore in the end States only need a rational reason for not allowing same-sex marriage. There are plenty of reasons why a State may choose not to allow same-sex marriage, and they don't need to provide factual support of these reasons, the reasons must only be rationally related to the law. In the end this should be left to the States and the Federal Government should stay out of it (and also the courts - but that won't happen).

Answer 3

The word "Marriage" has two different meanings. The "religious people" you refer to would have no problem with granting the secular meaning of “marriage” to gay couples. We don’t care if they have the same legal rights (insurance, wills/trusts, alimony, family discounts, etc.).

You can get married at a Church or by a Justice of the Peace. One has a religious connotation of being approved by God; the other being a secular union granted by the civil courts. Thus many marriages are already Civil Unions. In any union by the government, be it a marriage certificate or a civil union certificate, there should be no difference in the government’s eyes and they should be treated equally by the government.

Our concern is when it can be used to force a change to what we believe. To Catholics, a marriage is one of the Seven Sacraments. It is Holy and blessed by God. If the Catholic faith says the gay sexual act and lifestyle is a sin, then it cannot promote and marry such couples. To understand this you have to look beyond the mere secular values that most people hold and look at the spiritual values that the “religious people” build their life around. To make me accept a gay marriage or to promote abortions and birth control is to deny me the practice of my faith.

As you read some of the comments from others you will find that they don’t want equality in civil unions, they want the destruction of the spiritual values that they don’t agree with. That is why Planned Parenthood and Pro-Choice groups insist that we kill healthy babies right up to the completion of the delivery. There isn’t a need for this except to destroy the spiritual values (respect for life) of others.

I would be for the equality of Civil Unions with Marriage to keep the Churches from being forced to discriminate or change their values.

Answer 4

I think this question is one of money hiding behind the guise of morality and religion, because it would just 'cost too much to be fair with benefits, especially medical and insurance benefits...' but here you go -

in the United States, the term civil union connotes a status similar to marriage for same-sex couples; domestic partnership, offered by some states and municipalities, generally connotes a lesser status with fewer benefits, though this may vary.

The first civil unions in the United States were enacted by the state of Vermont in 2000. The federal government does not recognize these unions, and under the U.S. Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) of 1996, other U.S. states are not obliged to recognize them. By the end of 2006, Connecticut and New Jersey had also enacted civil union laws; New Hampshire (effective 1 January 2008, the only US jurisdiction providing civil unions without a court order). Followed in 2007; furthermore, California's domestic partnership law had been expanded to the point that it became practically a civil union law, too. The same might be said from 2007 for domestic partnership in Maine and domestic partnerships in District of Columbia and domestic partnership in Washington and domestic partnership in Oregon (effective 1 January 2008).

Answer 5

Hi,
I live in Vermont which has Civil Unions for people of the gay lifestyle. This allows gays everything a married person has legally under the law without creating special status gays. This seems fair without changing the marriage status of one Man and one Woman. (which is the real meaning of marriage in the eyes of God who created that institution). We don't really care if you guys hook up, but don't change the real meaning of marriage. It's disrespectful if you do. You want respect, and we do too, so don't rain on our Heterosexual parade!

Answer 6

Because it will take a long time for the average voter to agree with gay marriage. You have a much better chance of working on civil unions. Later and after? who knows. I see this as the best avenue for gays.