Are Civil Unions Different From Marriage

One of the most hotly contested issues in our day is the question of whether to accept or reject the concept of same gender marriage. This issue remains quite contentious in the main stream even though few (I know of one) presidential candidates actually support the idea of national legal recognition and acceptance of same gender marriage.

The majority of candidates reject imposing legal recognition of same gender marriage upon the entire country. Instead, where they differ is on the matter of "civil unions" or "domestic partnerships". These latter institutions seem to be an effort to provide the legal protections and benefits of marriage without the title.

Some candidates reject even these alternative institutions for the same reasons they reject same gender marriage. They simply want no legal recognition of any sort for same gender domestic relationships. The inherent consistency makes their positions easier to understand whether or not one agrees with them.

Its harder to understand those who do not support universal recognition of same gender marriage but at the same time do support this recognition for same gender civil unions. If civil unions convey the same rights, privileges, and responsibilities as legal marriage, is there really a difference other than terminology? Gay rights leaders seem to think there is. The American public as a whole seems to think there is a difference.

Current polls show the majority of Americans oppose same gender marriage. However, those same polls show a majority of Americans are not opposed to same gender civil unions. What is this perceived difference?

To the candidates who support civil unions and oppose national recognition of gay marriage I believe they see the difference as little more than a question of electability. If they support "gay marriage" they will hurt their chances with the voters because of the voters' perception of a difference. Yes, my cynicism is showing.

Actually, I think most of the American public is conflicted. The majority believe that same gender sexual relationships are morally wrong. Most will site religious reasons for these views. At the same time, they feel a civic responsibility to recognize the rights of others to differ. They recognize right of individuals not have the religious morals of other people (majority or not) imposed upon them by government. They resolve this conflict within their own minds by opposing same gender marriage but allowing for same gender civil unions or registered domestic partnerships. It would seem to be a distinction of convenience, a way of saying, "I will allow, but I will not approve."

Gay rights leaders must recognize this implicit disapproval. They must also fear that different terminology for marriage and civil unions will provide the basis for future legal discrimination. That is why I believe they will continue their push for national recognition of gay marriages even if they get nationally recognized civil unions. This issue is not going away any time soon.

That's my two cents.

Wade Houston
September 5, 2007