I was just invited to a “civil union” ceremony of two friends of mine, Stuart and Robert who own a home together and live in Lambertville, NJ. I have known them for years, they have been in a committed relationship for over 15 years and they adopted a son over six years ago—they are a great family.
When I told my husband that we were invited to their wedding, he said it’s not a “wedding” because it is not legal in NJ for same sex marriages. I was a bit confused not knowing so I looked it up.
Same sex marriage means legal marriage between people of the same sex. Only Massachusetts and California have legalized same sex marriage.
Civil unions were created to extend rights to same sex couples that are only recognized in the state where the couple resides. Vermont, Connecticut, New Jersey and New Hampshire are the states where you can have a civil union. Oregon and New York will this year.
The difference between the two, same sex marriage and civil unions is that only marriage offers federal benefits and protections such as social security benefits, veterans’ benefits, health insurance, pensions, hospital visitation, estates taxes and the like.
There are 32 states that have barred federal benefits for same sex partners.
Can you imagine if your partner could not receive your social security or pension benefits? Could you imagine that your partner could not visit or make life/health decisions for you while in an emergency situation at a hospital?
I guess where I am going with all of this, to me, it seems so unfair that just because the person you commit to, to spend your life with, through good times and bad and in this case, have a child with, is of the same sex, that they are not eligible by law, to receive the same benefits as cross sex marriages. Something just doesn’t seem right.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hey Terry.
I am really glad you posted something about this situation. It seems like something is missing in the U.S. when it comes to benefits and such with same sex unions. Hopefully with the future presidential administration there will be some change in this. State legislatures have the right to make a law (one the president passed) their own by tweaking it to fit their needs; therefore, thats the reason why the states are the way they are (unions or marriages, or nothing at all). In this case, it's a shame that your friends are getting the union in NJ. If benefits traveled, they could marry in MA, but I do not know if that is possible. On the brighter side, at least they are able to get a union. Best of luck to the both of them :)
It's rediculous that if a same sex couple chooses to spend their lives together in a family relatiohship that the govt. has the right to tell what benefits they are not entitled to. I don't agree with any of this but in 2006 you would think it would be illegal for the govt. to keep partners from visiting each other in the hospital.
I am pretty sure in NJ that civil unions recognize the spouse and that are eligible for their spouses benefits.... I like the topic of the post. Glad you addressed it.
Post a Comment