More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Evan Wolfson

Evan Wolfson

GET UPDATES FROM Evan Wolfson

What We Can Learn From Illinois

Posted: 02/ 3/11 04:17 PM ET

This week, Illinois' Governor Pat Quinn signed into law the Illinois Religious Freedom Protections and Civil Unions Act passed by the state's legislature in December. By creating civil union, a non-marriage marital status for certain couples, Illinois has brought the number of Americans living in jurisdictions that provide some measure of respect to same-sex couples under the law to 40 percent. Ten years ago, that number was almost zero.

Also in the last decade, five states and the District of Columbia have ended the exclusion of loving gay and lesbian couples from marriage. More states, including California, Maryland, New York, and Rhode Island, may well end the exclusion from marriage this year, while still others are moving toward the freedom to marry step by step.

The reason for this momentum is that more and more Americans are getting to know loving, committed gay and lesbian couples and understanding why marriage matters to them, too. They have watched their gay and lesbian friends and colleagues go through similar hardships and joys to those they have had in their own lives, and realized that their families deserve the same respect and protections as everyone else's. It's as simple as The Golden Rule.

Last year, former President Bill Clinton said of his own personal journey to supporting the freedom to marry, "I was hung up about the word. I had all these gay friends, I had all these gay couple friends, and I was hung up about it. And I decided I was wrong." Laura Bush, Cindy McCain, and even Glenn Beck have spoken out in support of ending marriage discrimination, and President Obama recently signaled that he too is on the journey toward embracing marriage equality, stating, "attitudes evolve, including mine. And I think that it is an issue that I wrestle with and think about because I have a whole host of friends who are in gay partnerships. I have staff members who are in committed, monogamous relationships, who are raising children, who are wonderful parents. And I care about them deeply." Later adding "It's pretty clear where the trend lines are going."

It is indeed quite clear: two separate polls in 2010 reported that a majority of Americans nationwide now support the freedom to marry for same-sex couples. As Americans - men and women, Democrat and Republican, younger and older - learn about real couples and think more deeply about how the denial of marriage hurts real families while helping no one, their hearts and minds change

What we have learned from states with civil union and similar interim mechanisms is that while a welcome step, civil union remains an abstraction to most people and is no substitute for the full measure of respect, clarity, security, responsibilities, and protections of marriage itself. Everyone knows what marriage means; it's a statement so important that most people wear its symbol on their hand. Civil union doesn't even have a verb.

Not only does civil union lack the respect and personal significance that comes with marriage, it does not adequately protect same-sex couples and their families. For example, as an official commission reported in New Jersey: in emergency rooms, in financial aid offices, and in companies across the state, same-sex couples are still being denied the rights and protections they were promised despite the passage of civil union in 2007. After 18 public meetings, 26 hours of oral testimony and hundreds of pages of written submission from more than 150 witnesses, the commission concluded that "the difference in terminology, between 'marriage' and 'civil union,' stigmatizes gays and lesbians and their families because they are singled out as different."

Why do we need two lines at the clerk's office? Would you trade your marriage - or your grandmother's - for a civil union? Couples who have made a personal commitment in life and are doing the work of marriage every day deserve equal commitment under law - and that is called marriage. It is time to get government out of the business of putting obstacles in the path of people seeking to take care of their loved ones, especially in tough economic times. Marriage matters. End the exclusion now, and let these loving couples wed.

Crossposted at www.freedomtomarry.org

 

Follow Evan Wolfson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/freedomtomarry

 
 
  • Comments
  • 7
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Contact1972
Honey Badger Don't Care
05:41 PM on 02/03/2011
The solution is so simple. ALL citizens regardless of their orientation should be treated equally under the law. The GOTP keep bringing religion and religious institutions into the argument for one reason only...to muddy the waters. Anyone with a lick of sense would know no church, firetemple, synagogue etc is being forced to perform equal marriages. And there isn't any need to anyway since there are tons of religious institutions that are more than happy to do so of their own volition.

When even conservatives such a looney toons Beck is for equal marriage groups like NOM have already lost....they just don't know it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ioan Lightoller
Proud Married Gay Pagan Man
01:32 PM on 02/03/2011
Thank you, thank you, thank you! This is a step in the right direction, but only a step. There is no need for this other than (largely) religiously-based bigotry. Why should my spouse and I have to stand in a separate line if we wanted to marry here in the states with civil unions? When we married in Canada, we stood in the same line as straight couples seeking a marriage license. When is this country going to start to learn to do INclusion instead of EXclusion?
photo
obtusegoose
aka David in Houston
11:43 AM on 02/03/2011
Here's (supreme hypocrite) Newt Gingrich's most recent comment about same-sex marriage:
“Look, I'm quite happy to say I come out of a tradition, which is several thousand years old, that says marriage is between a man and a woman,” Gingrich answered wryly. “And I'm prepared to defend that tradition. And I happen to believe it. And I think I have as much right to my belief as you have to yours.”

The only problems with his statement are: Traditional marriage for thousands of years has been a man and a woman OF THE SAME RACE. It’s been less than 50 YEARS since interracial marriage has been legal in the United States (1967). Based on Newt’s strong beliefs, President Obama’s parents should never been allowed to marry.

The other problem is that polygamy was given a big thumbs up in the Bible (Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon). So should assume that Newt supports polygamy since it was a long-held tradition.

The most glaring issue with his position is the non-traditional history of own marital status. Is it traditional to get married three times? I thought marriage was “’til death do you part”? Apparently, that’s one tradition that Newt has conveniently ignored. Isn’t that funny how that worked out? Divorce gets a BIG thumbs-down in the Bible, yet Newt has decided that some very specific traditions are outdated. -- Yeah, I think I’ll stick with the supreme hypocrite monicker. It suits him to a tee.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Jdaddy1951
03:17 PM on 02/03/2011
And in Newt's case, he believes in getting married and getting married often ...
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Jdaddy1951
08:09 AM on 02/03/2011
"... Why do we need two lines at the clerk's office? ..."

Good question. Isn't approving ONLY civil unions for same-sex couples equivalent to establishing "separate-but-equal" drinking fountains or schools? Equality is NOT equality until it is FULL equality.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ioan Lightoller
Proud Married Gay Pagan Man
01:35 PM on 02/03/2011
I'm with you, Jdaddy. I remember standing in line at the marraige license bureau in Windsor, Ontario and when the clerk came back with our license, I cried with happiness. We were just another couple getting a license to marry, not some separate gay couple being given a second-rate civil union license. That Canadian marriage license means the world to us.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Jdaddy1951
03:21 PM on 02/03/2011
I have a confession: I am something of a masochist in that I periodically play a tape of music I'd love to have played at my next wedding reception: ("At Last;" "Could I Have This Dance"; "Crazy"; "For Once in My Life"; all the great love songs used at weddings). Of course, after so many failed attempts and advancing age, I have doubts that one final last walk down the aisle to the altar will ever happen. But I can at least work for the groundwork of this pipe dream by hoping for the day that full and equal marital rights will be available to everyone, even if I'm too old for it by the time it happens.