Domestic partnerships, civil unions and gay marriage
by Angela Giampolo
21 months ago | 2647 views | 6 6 comments | 16 16 recommendations | email to a friend | print
While the quest for marriage equality goes forth, many wonder (justifiably) what the differences are among domestic partnerships, civil unions and marriage.

Throughout the years, dictionaries have struggled to define “marriage.” The 2010 American Heritage Dictionary defines marriage as “[t]he legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife and, in some jurisdictions, between two persons of the same sex, usually entailing legal obligations of each person to the other.” The 2005 online version of the American Heritage College Dictionary defines marriage as “[t]he legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife; a union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage ... a close union.” The 1993 hard-copy edition that I found of the same dictionary fails to mention “same-sex marriage” all together. It defines marriage as “[t]he legal union of a man and a woman as husband and wife.”

There are many state and federal benefits that married couples, as opposed to nonmarried couples, enjoy. For example, a married couple can file joint tax returns; inherit a deceased spouse’s property without tax consequence; and use the homestead protection, in which the couple’s home is protected from creditors when one spouse dies.

Partnerships vs. civil unions

The difference between domestic partnerships and civil unions is unclear and sometimes non-existent. A domestic partnership is a legal or personal relationship between two individuals who live together and share a common domestic life but are neither joined by marriage or civil union. Domestic partnerships tend to fall into two categories: 1) same-sex couples whose relationship is recognized by the state or local jurisdiction in which they live, or 2) same-sex couples who claim they are in a committed relationship to obtain work-related benefits that are available to heterosexual married employees. It varies but, typically, to obtain status as domestic partners, same-sex couples register with the relevant state or local jurisdiction. Registration alone does not give couples additional rights or benefits, but it is a first step in recognizing their relationship publicly.

Currently, Hawaii, Colorado, Maryland, Rhode Island, Maine, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, California and Wisconsin all have some form of domestic-partnership laws. In addition, cities such as Philadelphia, New York City and San Francisco provide some combination of registration and domestic-partner benefits.

New Jersey and Connecticut recognize civil unions. However, it is important to note that as of October 2010, Connecticut will only recognize marriage. Civil unions are state-sanctioned relationships that convey many of the benefits of marriage without calling it marriage. While civil unions are a start, they do not offer all the rights that marriage offers. Because of this, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that same-sex couples must be given the same rights under civil unions or marriage, even if the word “marriage” is not used.

Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont and, most recently, the District of Columbia allow gay marriage. However, due to other states and laws and the federal Defense of Marriage Act, these marriages may not be recognized as valid in other states and are not recognized by the federal government.

DOMA prevents same-sex couples who are married, in a civil union or a domestic partnership from taking advantage of federal protections that are available to all married heterosexual couples. Some of these are the right to take family leave when one partner is ill, the acceptance of Social Security benefits of a deceased partner and joint tax-filing benefits. Last year, President Obama took a small yet important step toward undermining DOMA by signing a memorandum extending benefits such as visitation and dependent-care rights to the same-sex partners of federal employees.

Court decisions

Some see domestic partnerships and civil unions as a step forward. However, others view it as government-sanctioned inequality, comparing the laws to “separate but equal” in our civil-rights history. So far, courts in Massachusetts, California and Connecticut have weighed in on the issue. These courts agreed that “names matter” and that nominal differences were unconstitutional. By labeling a group with a special designation, a state relegates it to second-class status. As the Connecticut court stated, “A mere difference on nomenclature” was a “form of separate but equal segregation” that only seeks to perpetuate and formalize discrimination against gays.

Other courts have reached a different outcome. As mentioned above, in “Lewis v. Harris,” the New Jersey Supreme Court held it was unconstitutional to withhold the benefits and responsibilities from same-sex couples, but did find that the use of the word “marriage” was unnecessary.

One major difference between marriage and either civil unions or domestic partnerships is that due to DOMA, the federal government only recognizes marriage, and so only legally married same-sex couples have legal standing to challenge DOMA.

The terminology for same-sex unions is constantly evolving, and the rights and responsibilities conferred vary widely by jurisdiction. As the fight for equality rages on, leaders in the LGBT community may have a choice to make: Do they push for change, including domestic partnerships and civil unions, or solely push for same-sex marriage? These early judicial decisions show that the jury is still out on which legal strategy would ensure equality.

Angela D. Giampolo, principal of Giampolo Law Group, has offices in Pennsylvania and New Jersey and specializes in LGBT, business, real-estate and civil-rights law. Her website is www.giampololaw.com

and she blogs at www.phillygaylawyer.com. Send her your legal questions to angela@giampololaw.com

.


Comments
(6)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
shadow_man
|
May 10, 2010
The American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the National Association of Social Workers state:

"There is no scientific basis for distinguishing between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples with respect to the legal rights, obligations, benefits, and burdens conferred by civil marriage."

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/documents/Amer_Psychological_Assn_Amicus_Curiae_Brief.pdf

Thus, mental health professionals and researchers have long recognized that being homosexual poses no inherent obstacle to leading a happy, healthy, and productive life, and that the vast majority of gay and lesbian people function well in the full array of social institutions and interpersonal relationships.

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/documents/Amer_Psychological_Assn_Amicus_Curiae_Brief.pdf

The research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality.

http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/therapeutic-response.pdf

The longstanding consensus of the behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions is that homosexuality per se is a normal and positive variation of human sexual orientation.

http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/sexual-orientation.aspx
shadow_man
|
May 10, 2010
This was taken from another poster that shows why we need to legalize gay marriage. If you don't feel for this person after reading it, you simply aren't human.

"I am not sure what our President thinks of this dicission but coming from a poor family and knowing what discrimination is all about I would assume he would not care if "Gays" have equal rights. The whole reason why they are asking for rights to be considered married is from the same reason why I would be for it. My own life partner commited suicide in our home with a gun to his heart. After a 28 year union I was deprived to even go his funeral. We had two plots next to each other. But because we did not have a marriage cirtificate "(Legal Document)" of our union his mother had him cremated and his ashes taken back to Missouri where we came from. That is only one example how painful it is. His suicide tramatized me so much and her disregard for my feelings only added to my heartach. That happened on March 21 of 2007 and I still cannot type this without crying for the trauma I have to endure each day. Oh did I mention I am in an electric wheelchair for life? Yes I am and it is very diffacult to find another mate when you are 58 and in a wheelchair. "
shadow_man
|
May 10, 2010
The National Library of Medicine pubs confirm that sexual orientation is natural, biologically induced in the first trimester of pregnancy, morally neutral, immutable, neither contagious nor learned, bearing no relation to an individuals ability to form deep and lasting relationships, to parent children, to work or to contribute to society.

From the American Psychological Association: homosexuality is normal; homosexual relationships are normal.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Asociation and American Psychiatric Asociation have endorsed civil marriage for same-sex couples because marriage strengthens mental and physical health and longevity of couples, and provides greater legal and financial security for children, parents and seniors.

America's premier child/mental health associations endorse marriage equality.

shadow_man
|
May 10, 2010
For those of you claiming homosexuality is a "lifestyle", that is a false and ignorant statement. Homosexuality is not a choice. Just like you don't choose the color of your skin, you cannot choose whom you are sexually attracted to. If you can, sorry, but you are not heterosexual, you are bi-sexual. Virtually all major psychological and medical experts agree that sexual orientation is NOT a choice. Most gay people will tell you its not a choice. Common sense will tell you its not a choice. While science is relatively new to studying homosexuality, studies tend to indicate that its biological.

http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/03/differential-brain-activation.pdf

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html

Gay, Straight Men's Brain Responses Differ

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155990,00.html

http://www.livescience.com/health/060224_gay_genes.html

http://www.springerlink.com/content/w27453600k586276/

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/06/16/172/

There is overwhelming scientific evidence that homosexuality is not a choice. Sexual orientation is generally a biological trait that is determined pre-natally, although there is no one certain thing that explains all of the cases. "Nurture" may have some effect, but for the most part it is biological.
shadow_man
|
May 10, 2010
To those of you using the Bible as a weapon against homosexuality, you are wrong. Homosexuality is not a sin. The Bible is constantly being taken out of context to support anti-gay views. Scholars who have studied the Bible in context of the times and in relation to other passages have shown those passages (Leviticus, Corinthians, Romans, etc) have nothing to do with homosexuality. These passages often cherry-picked while ignoring the rest of the Bible. The sins theses passages are referring to are idolatry, Greek temple sex worship, prostitution, pederasty with teen boys, and rape, not homosexuality or two loving consenting adults.

http://www.soulfoodministry.org/docs/English/NotASin.htm

http://www.jesus21.com/content/sex/bible_homosexuality_print.html

http://www.christchapel.com/reclaiming.html

http://www.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/BiblicalReferences.php

http://www.gaychristian101.com/



Thats why Jesus never mentions it as well. There is nothing immoral, wrong, or sinful about being gay. Jesus, however, clearly states he HATES hypocrites. If you preach goodness, then promote hate and twist the words of the Bible, you are a hypocrite, and will be judged and sent to hell. Homosexuals will not go to hell, hypocrites will.



This is very similar to the religious bigots of the past, where they took Bible passages to condone slavery, keep women down, and used Bible passages to claim blacks as curses who should be enslaved by the white man. People used God to claim that blacks marrying whites was unnatural, and not of God's will.
Dennis C. McGrath
|
May 07, 2010
Very nice, very concise, thank you!