The State of Illinois Will Recognize Same-Sex Unions
This month, the legislature passed the bill in order to legalize same-sex civil unions, and all it needed was the governor`s signature. Apparently, if things are okay and there`s no problem, it`s very likely that same-sex unions will be recognized in the State of Illinois, beginning with the year 2011.
However, keep in mind that same-sex unions are not synonymous to gay marriages. The textbook definition of the civil union says: "it is recognized legally, and it is similar to marriage". The difference is that marriage has many religious conotations and lots of people are against gay marriage as they stand for the traditional marriage, and this makes me think that a law regarding same-sex unions would be able to pass EASIER than a law regarding gay marriages.
Countries such as Austria, Denmark, France, Germany or Ireland are only a few of the 18+ countries where gay civil unions are recognized. Moreover, in countries such as Brazil or Croatia, there also exists "unregistered co-habitation", also known as domestic partnership, where gay couples are granted a set of rights which, unfortunately, is smaller than the rights offer to heterosexual married couples.
One thing`s for sure: since Illinois will recognize same-sex unions beginning with 2011, this means a step forward towards acceptance and equality.
Related posts:
- European Countries which have legalized Gay Marriage, Civil Unions and Registered Partnerships
- Marriage - A human right, not a heterosexual privilege! 5 reasons to legalize Gay Marriages
Persona non grata: Young, dedicated to writing articles and willing to make a change, whether we`re talking about how the people see us, the ones who are part of LGBT, or about writing some thoughts, opinions and other sort of material that hopefully others will find useful.
As usual a wonderfully written article. One other thing that I would like to point out that I think is often glossed over with the state level victories. Until we have federal recognition of the marriages and civil unions recognized at the state level these victories are largely symbolic and less stubstantive. True they are vital for inheritance law and usually require hospitals to recognize the partner but the really big things are all federal law. Even with a state recognized civil union or marriage if you are a same sex couple you do not have the following (Short list)
Equality in Immigration law
Equality in Tax law
Equality in Pension law
Equality in Social Security Survivorship
Immigration law is a big one because often, while the government won't deport the partner in a hetero sexual marriage, they also won't bat an eye about deporting the partner in a same sex union. This breaks up families and makes a huge inequity in situations where two people who really love each other have to jump through ten times the number of hoops to be together and still after 10 years may find the application rejected.
Tax Law - anyone who has decided to cover their partner on their health benefits experiences the most common form that this inequity takes. If you are in a heterosexual marriage you can include your spouse and children and even step children on your healthcare and it isn't taxed it is just allowed with no liability. If you cover your domestic partner though suddenly your the premium cost that your employer covers and the part that they pass on to you is considered taxable income. This is for your partner and their children so you see your paycheck usually reduced to roughly half of your gross pay.
Social Security and Pension Law - I'll put out two scenarios here.
Scenario A. Two people meet and fall in love and spend 42 years together. They register as domestic partners in a state that has a law titled "Everything But Marriage" that they were told conferred all the rights and responsibilities of marriage. One of them has always worked in jobs that he loves because the other is a networking engineer that helped set up computer networks in some of the earlier nuclear power plants and makes a really good living and when he retires gets a good private pension and also retired from the military so has a really good pension. They go on vacation and the provider in the relationship strokes out and dies.
Scenario B. A single guy that has two good pensions and a decent social security income goes on vacation in Vegas and marries someone he met that weekend. The day after they marry he drops dead of a stroke.
Which person's partner can get their pension and social security? Is it Scenario A where they were told they have everything but marriage and did everything right and shared their life for 42 years? Is it Scenario B where two strangers got drunk and visited the church of Elvis but happened to be opposite sex? If you answered the two that did everything right and were told they had everything but marriage you are WRONG. A friend of mine recently lost his partner of 42 years and when he called Social Security they said thank you for calling. He called the pension administrators and they said since the fed doesn't recognize you neither do we. He is now selling his home that he shared for 42 years because his income was cut by 75%. He always was a cook in a retirement home so his Social Security is negligible. WHen they were told that they had everything but marriage in WA he and his partner decided to make some withdrawls from the IRA's that his partner set up and do a few really nice vacations because they were equal now. Equality means that he gets social security and pension survivorship RIGHT? State victories are great but we need an intense, focused and persistent lobby for the Federal government to recognize equally the unions performed in the states where the states have chosen to recognize same sex unions. At this point the Federal Government is in violation of the constitution because it is not recognizing State decisions in regards to marriage and therefore not practicing equal application of the law from one state to the next.
This is absolutely fantastic! One state at a time it seems.