Tweet
Thanks to Ben Smith at Politico for posting this charming, humorous and informative video, “Civil unions, ‘not good enough.’” Apologies to the video impaired. It really isn’t useful to transcribe the text anyway, the meaning would be lost absent the actors’ performances.
To the video impaired, I refer you to Judge Vaughn Walker’s opinion finding Proposition 8 unconstitutional (PDF). This video is an excellent dramatization of the testimony heard at the trial and summarized below:
Social epidemiologist Ilan Meyer testified about the harm gays and lesbians have experienced because of Proposition 8. Meyer explained that Proposition 8 stigmatizes gays and lesbians because it informs gays and lesbians that the State of California rejects their relationships as less valuable than opposite-sex relationships. Proposition 8 also provides state endorsement of private discrimination. According to Meyer, Proposition 8 increases the likelihood of negative mental and physical health outcomes for gays and lesbians.
[LINETTE SCOTT, in her official capacity as Deputy Director of Health Information & Strategic Planning for the California Department of Public Health] explained that domestic partnerships cannot substitute for marriage because domestic partnerships do not have the same social and historical meaning as marriage and that much of the value of marriage comes from its social meaning. [Psychologist Letitia Anne] Peplau testified that little of the cultural esteem surrounding marriage adheres to domestic partnerships.
Proposition 8 places the force of law behind stigmas against gays and lesbians, including: gays and lesbians do not have intimate relationships similar to heterosexual couples; gays and lesbians are not as good as heterosexuals; and gay and lesbian relationships do not deserve the full recognition of society.
At the heart of all this, I believe LGBT citizens struggle with America’s stubborn refusal to recognize our families as important, as valuable, as worthy of respect.
- The US Federal Government and most states deny LGBT citizens the privileges and benefits endowed so carelessly to heterosexual couples.
- Our soldiers are not allowed to even speak of their family. The forces will not provide housing, transportation, health–or any–care for them.
- Department of Homeland Security deports our non-citizen partners, even our lawfully wedded ones.
- Our employers are free to fire us, regardless of job performance, because of who we go home to at night.
- We are told who we may or may not bring to prom, to school dances.
For these reasons, I support only full marriage equality.
For more information:
So, if you hear someone ask the question, “Why does the word matter?” Ask them if it would matter to them.
13 Comments
That’s nothing.You should see the look on friends and acquaintance’s faces when I refer to me and the mrs having been “notarized”….at the bank no less. That’s all we get anymore in Kalifornia
What did you wear on your Notarization day?
I forgetand there aren’t any pictures of the occasion to remember . I did get a congratulations and goodluck out of the bank person once I prompted him….Do remember the restaurant we went to after… excellent and somehow they knew to give us complementary bubbly.
It only mattersto the people who think that they understand an issue better than everyone else because they have memorized something that someone yelled out on Fox or hate radio. Those people are the human equivalent of “copy and paste” and nothing will every get through that noise. Besides, they are redefining the meaning of “freedom”. The people who need to see this to learn what the problem is are the ones who really don’t care who marries who and may not understand that the rights granted through civil unions are not the same as those granted through marriage. The former group is louder but I think that there are more in the latter group.
FOX/Rush addicts….'The equivalent of 'copy and paste' I love it. And since they only hear it, they always get the spelling wrong!.
CU Does not Equal MarriageIn late January/early February 2009, when Vermont Freedom to Marry and its legislative allies held a press conference at the statehouse to launch the intensive activist segment of the struggle, I was there. With a sign. The sign read:
The resulting AP photo got published in a lot of places across the country. Never thought I’d be a postergirl for marriage. Or be working on getting the armed forces to admit more of ‘us’ to be traumatized, wounded, or killed in the oil wars. But there it is. The two spheres where exclusion holds us back from full equality: military service and marriage.
Couldn’t get anyone to take me up on the trade.
Matter of factI have more than one gay cousin. The gay thing seems to run on my dad’s side more so than mom’s side.
Led to an argument between my father and I when I told him not just me but two of my cousins were gay. Then he starts calling my cousin on my mothers side gay and I’m all “What the hell???”
My maternal cousin is a geek, not gay.
And they forgot to mention that you might have a sister or brother who is gay, or even a mother or father, or grandmother or grandfather, or aunts, uncles, etc.
We are EVERYWHERE!
Civil unions and partnerships are examples of second class citizenship. A key definition of a homohating bigot a person who opposes same sex marriage. As in ‘gawd’s in the mix’.
Ben Smith at Politicoit should be noted has done some very good reporting on LGBT issues over the years. It’s a bit odd, as Politico has a Republican slant to many of it’s story frames. And for his troubles, he’s being called some unflattering names in his comment section. Shame to see an ally who’s dared to report these issues fairly, take abuse.
Maybe he’ll find a more worthy home. Or maybe he’ll stay in the belly of the beast and speaking truth to ignorance. Either way, he’s a solid guy we should all acknowledge as part of the solution, not the problem and thank.
There is no legal difference at the state levelbetween a civil union and a marriage. At the state level, which is the only place this matters since its null and void at the federal level, you really are just arguing about a word.
The only distinction between the two is that one receives federal recognition (and thus comes with added benefits) and one does not. The thing is that the federal government won’t recognize it if you call it a marriage either.
Its not civil unions vs marriage that is the real issue. Its state vs federal recognition that is the heart of the matter.
A civil union should be a perfectly valid compromise as long as state laws treat them the same way within each state.
The rest is just noise.
Legally it’s not “just” the word –Currently California (along with any other state with an “exactly like marriage except we won’t let you call it that” DP scheme) has a “separate but equal*” arrangement and claims that this satisfies any obligations to equal protection. And there’s always that asterisk on “equal”.
Did you even watch the video?The video address extra-legal implications of the word,”marriage”.
In additon, your blanket statement about civil unions = marriage (in some cases domestic partnerships) at the state level is incorrect as there are exemptions and exceptions. Neveda RDP law does not require health benefit coverage and Washinton state’s RDP law has health benefits deferred to the future. Today in Illinois the civil union bill being discussed in the Assembly allows religious groups to deny ss couple adoptions (that’s in addition to all the other state giveaways in the name of God is in the mix.)
Alos incomplete information about federal recognition of state marriages. To remind you, there are several federal court cases now on appeal by the OB9 one’s DOJ which says the feds have to grant specific rights to ss married couples.
Good point.They sometimes get the spelling right though, for example they would type part of what you wrote as “since they only here it”. ;^)