Marriage/civil unions/domestic partnerships = same thing? (1 Viewer)

[jamesrage]

IS there a difference between marriage,civil unions and domestics partnerships or is it the same thing?

You all pretty much know that I oppose gay marriage and I know who supports gay marriage or who is most likely to support gay marriage.THis thread is not about wether or not you oppose or support gay marriage.This thread is about what do you beleave are the differences between marriage,civil unions and domestic partnerships or do you beleave they are the same.



I beleave they are the same.I learned from the military that changing the name of something does not make it different.For example when I was in the Army all liquore stores on post were called class six stores,all the restrooms/bathrooms were called latrines,phillips screw drivers were called cross tip screw drivers,Grocery stores were called commissaries and so on.
If you call cow dung a cow pie,cow ****, or cow turd do those names change what it is?


Perhaps I am wrong and there is actually a difference between marriage,civil unions and domestic partnerships.

 

[PeteEU]

In Danish law (and many European laws) all marriages are basicly civil unions regardless if its a hetro or gay. However only hetro marriages can be preformed in a church which is the religious aspect and that is usually outside the goverments control.

Both hetro and gay "marriages" or civil unions are almost equal in the eyes of the law. Hence tax law, various rights and so on. The only part that is still a bit different is adoption I think, but that is to be changed to being equal also. Something to do with human rights and equality in the eyes of the law...

The debate in the US is totaly warped into the religious aspect in my view. A marriage might be a religious thing for many people but the legal and tax implications have zero to do with the religious aspect per say.

On the other hand denying a group of people the same rights as hetros on the sole basis of religious dogma is wrong. There is no difference between this and the aparthid rules of the south or South Africa where blacks were treated different and lesser rights purely based on the colour of thier skin.

There is nothing that forbids churchs to refuse to marry gay couples in a church.. that is after all not needed not even the US as far as I know to make a marriage legal.

But why deny inheritance advantages or tax advantages or other advantages married people get, if 2 people of the same sex happen to love each other and want to commit themselvs to each other?

Of course one could just deny gays these rights and then take them away from married couples too, so to level the playing field. How does that sound?

 

[nineplus]

Perhaps I am wrong and there is actually a difference between marriage,civil unions and domestic partnerships.

It depends how the government is going to define whatever part of this they participate in.............via perks, convenience laws (including, but not limited to death benefits, taxes, social security etc) and how they handle the split of said unions.............ie: are they all handled equally

As long as the government picks a term, extends it and its benefits/responsibilities to everyone equally, I don't care if one term or another is used.............nor do I mind another group/organization (such as a religion) nabbing one of the cast off terms and using it for its own, even with strict parameters of who they will allow to take it on within the boundaries of their organizational blessing.

What I do not wish to see is one term and one set of perks extended to this group but forbidden to another group...........or even two different terms applied to the groups based simply on perceived differences. At a governmental level they shouldn't be distinguishing between adults who wish to legally unite.

 

[jamesrage]

But why deny inheritance advantages or tax advantages or other advantages married people get, if 2 people of the same sex happen to love each other and want to commit themselvs to each other?

There are these things called wills and power of attorney that ensure that individuals can leave each other their stuff or have visitation rights and many other things.

 

[Thinker]

There are these things called wills and power of attorney that ensure that individuals can leave each other their stuff or have visitation rights and many other things.

I understand that such things do not address the majority of the problems.

If they did, the solution would be to take away all rights from traditional
marriages and all couples can be equal and make use of wills and powers of
attorney. The lawyers would love it!

 

[JustineCredible]

There are these things called wills and power of attorney that ensure that individuals can leave each other their stuff or have visitation rights and many other things.

Obviously the concept of "contest" hasn't crossed your mind.

Just because a gay/lesbian couple do have wills or living wills does not guarantee these documents will not be contested. All too often there are civil law cases where grandparents of a child of a gay/lesbian couple will attempt to secure custody of said child because the grandparents simply cannot abide by the wishes of the decedent partner.

Also wills and living wills do nothing to secure Social Security survivor benefits for the non-biological children of deceased gay/lesbian co-parents. In other words lets say a lesbian couple has a child. One partner is the biological parent and one is a co-parent. Now lets say the non-biological parent dies. The surviving child cannot claim Survivor benefits because that child was not the biological child of the decedent.

Let's say a gay couple lives together as a family unit. Lets say one partner is a cop and the other is the biological parent of a child the couple has co-raised. The child and surviving partner cannot claim survivor benefits if the cop is killed in the line of duty.

These are situations that are not fictional, they happen all the time and it's the CHILDREN who are the victims!

Not because their parents are gay/lesbian, but because society is closed minded and archaic!

 

[nineplus]

These are situations that are not fictional, they happen all the time and it's the CHILDREN who are the victims!

Not because their parents are gay/lesbian, but because society is closed minded and archaic!

thank you, thank you, thank you!!!!

I toss up my hands when people start in on the "just make a will" crapola or "just get a POA" stuff..........when put so simply out there as some sort of iron clad solution I shake my head and hope the person saying it is one day (since they obviously aren't now) aware of what an easy life they've led in order to be able to see things as so simplistically.

there are sooooooooo many examples I could toss out in response to those types of comments.........things from my own life and/or that of the lives around me.........but I usually just end up shaking my head instead.

glad to hear someone else speaking out instead of giving up

 

[jamesrage]

Obviously the concept of "contest" hasn't crossed your mind.

Just because a gay/lesbian couple do have wills or living wills does not guarantee these documents will not be contested. All too often there are civil law cases where grandparents of a child of a gay/lesbian couple will attempt to secure custody of said child because the grandparents simply cannot abide by the wishes of the decedent partner. !

Do you have any real links to support this claim?I would think the ACLU website might have something if these claims of yours were remotely true.

 

[FallingPianos]

1138 federal legal benefits of marriage "Consequently, as of December 31, 2003, our research identified a total of 1,138 federal statutory provisions classified to the United States Code in which marital status is a factor in determining or receiving benefits, rights, and privileges."

 

[JustineCredible]

Do you have any real links to support this claim?I would think the ACLU website might have something if these claims of yours were remotely true.

Fine, if you so insist upon fact: Gay Couples Not Allowed At Rhode Island Cemeteryhttp://365gay.com/Newscon06/03/032206tomb.htm


Congressman Frank Disappointed by Treatment of Same-Sex Couple Survivors
3/19/2002

http://tampabaycoalition.homestead.com/files/320BarneyFrank911GayCompensation.htm

Other Tragedies

four fifths of the way down the page: http://www.buddybuddy.com/survive.html

Alabama Supreme Court Rules Against Lesbian Parent

http://www.gaylawnet.com/news/1998/ch980406.htm#alabama_court

Ruled Out
Non-Biological Moms Lose Rights When Relationships End

http://www.gaylawnet.com/news/1998/ch980406.htm#alabama_court

State Appeals Court: No Child Support Owed by Lesbian

http://www.gaylawnet.com/news/2004/ch0405.htm#state_appeals

 

[jamesrage]

Fine, if you so insist upon fact: Gay Couples Not Allowed At Rhode Island Cemeteryhttp://365gay.com/Newscon06/03/032206tomb.htm


Congressman Frank Disappointed by Treatment of Same-Sex Couple Survivors
3/19/2002

http://tampabaycoalition.homestead.com/files/320BarneyFrank911GayCompensation.htm

Other Tragedies

four fifths of the way down the page: http://www.buddybuddy.com/survive.html

Alabama Supreme Court Rules Against Lesbian Parent

http://www.gaylawnet.com/news/1998/ch980406.htm#alabama_court

Ruled Out
Non-Biological Moms Lose Rights When Relationships End

http://www.gaylawnet.com/news/1998/ch980406.htm#alabama_court

State Appeals Court: No Child Support Owed by Lesbian

http://www.gaylawnet.com/news/2004/ch0405.htm#state_appeals

Do you have any real links to back your claims up?I would think such cases would be huge ACLU cases.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

"Marriage" is a legal term with specific definitions, conditions, and benefits.

As are "civil union" and "domestic partnership".

The more those definitions, conditions, and benefits match up with those associated with "marriage", the more like "marriage" those social arrangements are.

The people that are fighting over the name, instead of fighting over the definitions, just need to be smacked. If you call it a marriage and your church calls it a marriage, who cares what the State calls it, as long as you get all the legal rights?

 

[jamesrage]

The people that are fighting over the name, instead of fighting over the definitions, just need to be smacked

It puzzles me why someone would think giving something a different name would make it different.If I called cow dung a cow pie does that cow dung any different?

 

[FallingPianos]

It puzzles me why someone would think giving something a different name would make it different.If I called cow dung a cow pie does that cow dung any different?

who thinks giving marriage a different name would change it?

 

[jamesrage]

who thinks giving marriage a different name would change it?

Start a gay marriage thread and state how you beleave that only domestic partnerships and civil unions should be for gay and that marriage is for striaghts and you will see them come out of the woodwork.

 

[Naughty Nurse]

Start a gay marriage thread and state how you beleave that only domestic partnerships and civil unions should be for gay and that marriage is for striaghts and you will see them come out of the woodwork.

Don't really care what you call it, really. Civil union is fine with me. Hate to p1ss on your fireworks!!

 

[Gilluin]

There are these things called wills and power of attorney that ensure that individuals can leave each other their stuff or have visitation rights and many other things.

The simple answer is to do away with all marriage liscenses. In effect then there would be no debate on this issue and everyone would have to go though the same legal hoops to protect their families. Since you seem to think this is the answer I challenge you to have your marriage anulled. Go though these legal hoops that you want gays and lesbians to have to go through. A marriage license and a civil union should be titled the same thing in the eyes of the law all should be the same for all couples. Either all get marriage liscenses or civil unions or nothing at all.

 

[Ausonius]

Texas recently passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage, which provides in pertinent part:

“Sec. 32. (a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.
(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.”

Interestingly, Texas is one of the few states that have recognized “common-law marriage (viz., where a couple have held themselves out as being married); and one wonders how the new amendment will affect those who have failed to fulfill the necessary formalities of “getting hitched.”