Civil Unions v. Marriage

We have carried the responsibilities of same-sex love with us for a long time.  The rights, however, have rested with a few: the states of Massachusetts and Vermont, the mayor of San Francisco, the Connecticut Supreme Court, N.Y Governor David Patterson, the California Supreme Court, and the voters of California.  That list includes only the significant players in this debate, as was there any doubt that Florida and Arizona would be the latest to attempt to 'define' marriage on their own terms?

Now that Proposition 8 has passed in California, however, it is time for the LGBT community to take a more proactive approach and less defensive stance.  It is time we teach America what we have known for a long time: that love and commitment are much more than the word marriage can convey, the sanctity of love trumps the sanctity of a marriage license, and that love is blind and does not categorize by gender.

There are many aspects of this approach to consider, but it starts with separating the civil aspects of marriage, the social connotations of the word, and the real definition of the word 'marriage.'

With the separation of church and state enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, there is but one way to go: Civil Unions.  I care not if the religious right want to keep the word marriage - it's never been one of my favorite words anyhow - just give same-sex couples the same rights and responsibilities as opposite-sex couples. 

Make those wishing to make a legal commitment recognized by the state and federal government get a civil union, and then any couple can head to their place of worship to have their union 'sanctified.'  The church can even throw in the phrase "I now pronounce you man and wife" and produce a marriage certificate - yet one that has no legal standing.

Then everyone gets treated equally under the rule of law, and everyone gets to choose how they wish to honor their love and commitment.

Seems like a basic American civics class to me.  Respectful of everyone's beliefs, and allows both same-sex and opposite-sex partners to enter into either or both the legal and religious aspects of their love and commitment.

 

Comments

[CP in DC]

Seems an impossible task to change the concept of marriage for the average American. A good idea, and one that is surely in our nation's best interest - but not sure it survives the political testing grounds of America just yet.

Maybe in a few decades the average American will understand this concept, but I'm not sure now is the time.