Civil Unions - For All of Us

Civil Unions – For all of Us

The political landscape on giving gay couples the same rights as heterosexual married couples is starting to shift. More Americans and more politicians are lining up behind the idea of “civil unions” as an alternative to “marriage.” This month New Hampshire became the fourth state to legalize civil unions, and other states, like New Mexico, will soon debate the issue in their legislative sessions.

For some gay activists, the idea of a “civil union” seems like a cop-out, offering them second-class citizenship instead of the full rights of married heterosexual couples. Others feel that only this incremental approach will be enough to overcome the nearly fifty percent of the public that remains opposed to any form of union between homosexuals.

I well remember the first time I was married; it was very early on a cold March day on Long Island when my fiance and I showed up at the house of a local justice of the peace. We were greeted by his wife, still wearing her bathrobe and slippers. The only thing missing were the hairnet and curlers. The justice himself chain-smoked through the whole process, and I can't say it was a particularly moving event in my life. It was a civil ceremony, short and to the point, and we did it precisely for all the reasons that gay couples want civil unions: taxes, health benefits, inheritance, the right to advocate for an incapacitated partner.

A few months later I married the same man in a religious ceremony presided over by a Lutheran minister and a Catholic priest. It was a beautiful ritual, held in front of family and friends, to affirm our love and our promise to spend the rest of our lives with one another. It had no legal effect whatsoever, but it did give us an event to remember and celebrate for many years to come.

So why shouldn't all of us consider the possibility of separating “marriage” with all of its trappings of religion and ritual from the legal institution of a “civil union”? If the state were to offer everyone “civil unions,” based on nothing less than the legal privileges now accorded to married persons, we could create a completely level playing field between gay and heterosexual couples. We could call ourselves “cued” (“civil unioned”) on IRS and census forms and “married” at social events like Back-to-School-Night and office parties.

If everyone were “cued,” the whole alleged attack on “marriage” by gay couples would become a moot point, at least in political terms. People could still order flowers, buy gowns and tuxedos, and affirm their unions in the church, temple, mosque, or synagogue of their choice. These events just wouldn't have any legal status. They would be private celebrations of love between two people in front of friends and family.

I've been happily married for over twenty years, but I'd just as happily commemorate my next anniversary as a “civil union” if that change in legal status meant that other couples, particularly gay couples, could have the same privileges and responsibilities that I've enjoyed for so many years with the man I love. Wouldn't that be something to celebrate?