After the lost of Marriage Equality in several states, some within the LGBT community are looking to civil unions as an alternative to marriage.
In the weeks since Maine voters handed the gay marriage movement its 27th electoral defeat in five years, other activists have voiced similar qualms about making marriage their main goal.Also...
Gay rights leaders have insisted that anything less than full marriage equality is unacceptable, but some are asking whether the uncompromising strategy has forestalled interim steps that could improve the lives of gay men, lesbians and their families.
"They think the best way to achieve their goal of marriage with all the rights and benefits of marriage is a complete frontal assault, and any other strategy is a betrayal of their goal," Leland Traiman said.
Activists like Traiman point to the success of efforts to extend spousal rights and other civil rights protections to same-sex couples, even as the passage of gay marriage bans grab headlines.
The success of partner measures in those states suggests that there's room for gay couples to secure spousal protections even if they can't marry, said William Dobbs, a veteran activist in New York.Believe it or not, more folks are leaning toward this idea. As I read more articles or go to LGBT group discussions, people are beginning to see a different path.
"It's a huge tactical mistake to be arguing that nothing less than marriage will do," Dobbs said. "One size does not fit all. "There is a real need among some folks to put their lives together, to have joint credit cards, a house and children," he said. "We need a set of actions for that, but the marriage fight is toxic to other types of reforms."
In fact, some polls has shown the marriage issue slipping down the major list of LGBT wants.
I don't know what to think about this, I actually see both sides. I want the legal rights and protections, but the ability to feel and be treated like a regular citizen are highly important.
However, if we continue to lose more Marriage Equality battles, I believe more folks will move towards civil unions. And so far, that path is slowly getting clearer.
source
8 comments:
I, too, see both sides. I've come to the conclusion getting the foot in the door is a great idea, and might help the move to marriage equality rather than repeatedly getting the door slammed in our faces.
I, too, read this article, and, big surprise, I am not up for taking the crumbs the right wing wants to give me to placate me.
i want the right to marry.
Marry, not civil union-ary.
I can see this as a foot in the door. Perhaps this step will make marriage equality happen sooner. I hope something will.
Most folks feel it will make them a partial person, however, at the end of the day most folks just want the rights and benefits.
Also, a new convo might be: What does it mean to "marry"?
I'm pushing for full marriage equality. I will not engage in the game of semantics.
The reason I push for marriage, the more states that do that will make it somewhat easier for a federal overturn of DOMA.
Full marriage all the way, is the way to go. Taking separate, but equal status, will only hurt us in the long run.
I approve of civil unions. Being that I'm not a religious man the term "marraige" has too many religious implications. As long as I have my equal rights and treatment I don't care what it's called. I mean I can understand not wanting the whole "seperate but equal" thing but...right now it seems like we're just spinning gears. Why not get a civil union and just call it marraige? They can't stop you from doing that.
I'm for civil unions myself as like Toddy English I'm not religious either. An opposite sex "marriage" is nothing but an opposite-sex union with a religious conotation associated with it. If you don't see working towards progress with civil union and then marriage as a solution you are in for a LONG ASS FIGHT where many people who just want the rights and benefits and could careless about the name are going to be hurt because of stubborness.
Post a Comment