Revisit Same-Sex Marriage

I was heartened to read this editorial this morning in the Hartford Courant. We have had civil unions in the state of Connecticut for a year now. Kent and I have opted not to get one. We are going to wait for marriage. This year, legislation will be introduced for full marriage equality for gay couples. I’m not sure what it’s chances are, but as long as people are talking about this, there’s reason to hope, right?

Mark Twain famously illustrated the difference between the right word and the almost right word by using as an example the difference between “lightning” and “lightning bug.” Although the writer chose humor to get his point across, his message should be taken seriously.

To same-sex couples, one word - marriage - can be life-changing. No matter how long they have been together as a family, no matter how many children they have raised, no matter how much they love each other, only in one state, Massachusetts, do they have the choice to marry. Even then, they are denied many of the legal rights and privileges that heterosexual couples enjoy.

The extent of their commitment is not recognized in other states, and most glaringly, by the federal government. Same-sex couples can’t file joint federal tax returns or qualify for Social Security benefits at the death of a partner. They can’t give tax-free gifts to their mates or even get divorced. Except in Connecticut and Vermont, which recognize civil unions, they can’t make medical decisions for each other.

Perhaps most poignantly, they can’t give their children the security of knowing that their parents are legally bonded in the same way as children of heterosexual parents.

Connecticut can be proud that it took a step toward ending this discrimination by granting gay and lesbian couples the right to form civil unions, the first state to do so without pressure from the courts. Now, it is time to continue the conversation with a goal of making same-sex marriage a reality.

“Civil union” is the almost-right word, but not the right one. It constitutes a separate status. This is not equality. Yes, the status gives same-sex couples state legal rights that married couples enjoy. But civil unions do not bestow upon them that all-important word, married, a universally understood sign of commitment and social acceptance.

Passage of civil union legislation should not stand as a reason or an excuse to forgo debate on what same-sex couples really want and deserve - to be seen as married in the eyes of the state. Nor should lawmakers defer to the state Supreme Court, soon to hear a case that may bear on the same-sex marriage question. It is the responsibility of all branches of government to end discrimination where it exists.

Beth Kerrigan and Jody Mock, plaintiffs in the pending Supreme Court case, have been together for 14 years. They have two 5-year-old boys they have raised since infancy. They live, in their own words, “a normal life.” Yet they and their children are denied the emotional security of true marriage.

It is ironic that their struggle for equality comes at a time when heterosexual marriages are not only failing at a greater rate, but declining. The U.S. Census shows that the percentage of households headed by married couples is in the minority. For the first time, more American women live without spouses than with them. This says a lot about greater choices and about changing values. But society should encourage more stable families, not fewer.

It is folly to deny couples who embark on a permanent commitment the right to legitimate recognition. What’s in a word? For those who want to marry and can’t, plenty. (source)

There were many comments entered to the editorial. This is what I added.

This is exactly why my partner and I have not received a “civil union”. After being together for 31 years, we simply feel that applying this second-class status of a “civil union” to our relationship, is simply beneath it’s dignity.

We worry about the future and about what protections we don’t have, as a gay couple. We worry about this every time we take a trip, with our legal papers in hand, hoping that, if something should happen, they would be honored. But what price do you put on the dignity of yourself, and your relationship, if you are willing to apply a second-class arrangement to it?

If civil unions are so equal, how many heterosexual married couples would be willing to trade in their marriage for a civil union? (source)

And so, we begin the whole process again. A bill is indeed being introduced shortly to allow gay couples to enter into civil marriage. We’ll wait and see what happens. Attending legislative hearings is tough business because you have to sit there and listen to a whole gamut of people who have their opinions of gay people; from saying that we should be equal, to saying that we are perverts who should probably be in jail.

I remember one person last time who stated that we were wasting time talking about this issue because gay people were not being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry. That person smuggly said, with a bit of a smirk on his face that, “Gay people are not kept from marriage. They can marry anyone they want, as long as it’s someone of the opposite sex.” I had to fight an impulse to dart across the chamber, beat the crap out of him and say, “And THIS is your sanctity of marriage?” And here, all this time, I thought that marriage was about love.

So, I may not attend these hearings, unless we are asked to make a statement to the panel from a long-time couple.

HARTFORD - Debate on legalizing gay marriage in the state will begin next week.

Love Makes a Family of Connecticut, the chief proponent of 2005’s landmark civil-union legislation, has scheduled a press conference for Jan. 31 at the Capitol with the leaders of the Judiciary Committee, state Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, and state Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-New Haven.

No bill has been drafted yet, McDonald said.

“This will be introducing the concept for debate,” he said in an interview. “It would allow any couple, regardless of sexual orientation, to enter into a civil marriage.” (source)