3 of 34

Yes

Write now Print Email Article Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites Contact this writer

Yes, I believe that gays and lesbians should be allowed civil unions. This would allow for same-sex couples (as well as opposite-sex couples who can't enter into legal marriage for whatever reason) to have most of the legal protections that married couples have. I believe that the laws of most states unjustly take rights away from non-married partners. I'm straight, but have seen how people have been hurt by not having their family status recognized.

I do believe that Scripture and Christian tradition have established marriage as being between one man and one woman. However, I think that Christian marriage as recognized by the Church and civil marriages or unions are two different things. Much of the controversy stems from the fact that many religious groups opposed to civil unions don't make this distinction. It's possible to favor civil unions without necessarily endorsing same-sex marriage within a church body.

What do many same-sex couples face? One, inheritance rights in the case of one dying without a will favor the closest blood or legal relative. In the event of one not having any family, the estate would pass to the state. Without some sort of civil recognition, the partner would be disregarded altogether.

Many gay and lesbian couples have children together. Some are from previous relationships, some lesbian couples have biological children where one of the women utilized donated sperm to conceive, and others are adopted by the couple. Unless the children are from a previous marriage or adopted by both partners, in the event of the death of the legal custodial parent, the children may be raised by other family members instead of the surviving parent.

One agonizing scenario that plays out all too often is when someone doesn't have a guardian appointed in the event of their incapacitation. A partner could find themselves unable to see their partner in the hospital, others who are unaware of their wishes could end up making end-of-life decisions, and the partner could be barred from making funeral arrangements.

A friend alerted me to a situation where these things could have happened. She had a cousin ("Kate") who had lived with her partner ("Paula") for several years. Paula had kids from a previous marriage, and her kids all treated Kate as a stepmom, with the exception of the oldest, who lived on her own. Paula developed uterine cancer that quickly had her incapacitated. When Paula was hospitalized and close to death, her oldest daughter tried to bar Kate from making any decisions. Paula's daughter even wanted the funeral to be held at her own church, instead of the one that Paula had attended with Kate. Fortunately, the couple had made all the necessary arrangements shortly after they'd purchased a home together.

In an ideal situation, everyone would have all the necessary legal arrangements in order before anything happens. However, deaths or severe illnesses and injuries can happen very unexpectedly. Does the surviving partner deserve to be punished because of these circumstances? I don't think so!

While not an all-inclusive solution, recognition of civil unions would help non-married couples. Recognizing such unions does not threaten the rights of married couples or prohibit anyone from marrying. In the long run, lobbying against civil unions turns out to be anti-family, rather than pro-family.

Learn more about this author, Amanda Demers.
Click here to send author comments or questions.

more options

hide

Add your voice

Know something about Should gays and lesbians be allowed civil unions but not marriage??
We want to hear your view. Write now!