The Nappy Cat Chronicles

First and foremost, the different types of partnerships must be delineated.

Same-Sex Marriage:

At present, same-sex [civil] marriages are recognized in Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, South Africa, Spain, and the U.S. state of Massachusetts (for same-sex marriages performed within that state under its laws). Israel’s High Court of Justice recently ruled to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other countries, although it is still illegal to perform them within the country.¹⁶

Outside of Massachusetts, where same-sex marriage is legal, Vermont, California, and Connecticut are the only U.S. states to offer same-sex couples some or all of the state-level rights and benefits of marriage; the District of Columbia does as well. They do not use the word “marriage,” however, but call such unions “civil union” or “domestic partnership”.¹⁷

Civil Union:

A civil union is a legal partnership agreement between two persons. Civil Unions were introduced in the UK and elsewhere to attempt to give legal rights to same-sex couples equal to those enjoyed by opposite-sex couples in marriage. Many people are critical of civil unions because they say it creates a separate status that’s unequal to marriage. Others are critical because they say it is introducing same-sex marriage by using a different name.¹⁸

Common-Law Marriage:

Common-law marriage…is, historically, a form of interpersonal status in which a man and a woman are legally married. The term is often mistakenly understood to indicate an interpersonal relationship that is not recognized in law. In fact, a common law marriage is just as legally binding as a statutory or ceremonial marriage in most jurisdictions — it is just formed differently.

The essential distinctions of a common law marriage are:

1. Common law marriages are not licensed by government authorities.
2. Common law marriages are not necessarily solemnized.
3. There is no public record of a common law marriage (i.e., no marriage certificate).
4. Cohabitation alone does not amount to common law marriage; the couple in question must hold themselves out to the world to be husband and wife.

In some jurisdictions, a couple must have cohabited and held themselves out to the world as husband and wife for a minimum length of time for the marriage to be recognized as valid.¹⁹

Domestic Partnership:

In the United States, domestic partnership is a state or employer-recognized status similar to marriage that may be available to same-sex couples and, sometimes, opposite-sex couples. Although similar to marriage, a state-recognized legal domestic partnership does not confer many of the 1,049 rights afforded to a civil marriage. Domestic partnerships in the United States are determined on a state-by-state basis, and sometimes on a city-by-city or county-by-county basis.

States with same-sex domestic partnership provisions include New York, California, Hawaii, Maine, and New Jersey, as well as the District of Columbia.²⁰

The Effort to Define Marriage:

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) does two things. First, it provides that no State shall be required to give effect to a law of any other State with respect to a same-sex “marriage.” Second, it defines the words “marriage” and “spouse” for purposes of Federal law.

DOMA is not meant to affect the definition of “spouse”…It ensures that whatever definition of “spouse” may be used in Federal law, the word refers only to a person of the opposite sex.²¹

[Originally proposed by Colorado republican Rep. Marilyn Musgrave in 2002] the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) [H.J. Res 56] is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution which would define marriage in the United States as a union of one man and one woman. The FMA also would prevent judicial extension of marriage-like rights to same-sex couples or other unmarried persons. The most recent vote on the proposed amendment took place in the Senate on June 7, 2006. The amendment failed to pass; of the 60 votes required to [end the debate], 49 senators voted for putting the amendment to vote and 48 voted against.

Marriage in the United States of America shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.

The first sentence of the FMA would prevent any state from allowing same-sex marriage, even if the voters of that state amended the state’s constitution to require recognition of same-sex marriages. Ratification of the amendment would cause the dissolution of existing same-sex marriages currently recognized in Massachusetts.

The amendment was written by the Alliance for Marriage, an organization founded by Matt Daniels.²²

The Claims:

Shared beliefs have created a broad alliance between the Catholic Leadership Conference and the Alliance for Marriage. In full support of the [Federal Marriage Amendment] written… the Catholic Leadership Conference (CLC) has joined AFM in endorsing the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman.

“These are momentous times: Soon the Senate will vote on S.J. 1 ‘[Federal Marriage Amendment].’ If we do not act now to protect marriage, our children and grandchildren will pay a terrible price.”

(Same-sex) marriage teaches that men and women don’t need each other, that children don’t need mothers and fathers and that marriage is primarily about affirming adults’ diverse intimacy needs rather than protecting children.”²³

As the transient, promiscuous, and unfaithful relationships that are characteristic of homosexuals become part of society’s image of marriage, fewer marriages will be permanent, exclusive, and faithful–even among heterosexuals. So-called “conservative” advocates of same-sex civil marriage are optimistic that legal unions would change homosexuals for the better; it seems far more probable that homosexuals would change marriage for the worse.²⁴

The Empirical Evidence:

The data indicate that same-sex and heterosexual relationships do no differ in their essential psychosocial dimensions; that a parent’s sexual orientation is unrelated to her or his ability to provide a health and nurturing family environment; and that marriage bestows substantial psychological, social, and health benefits. It is concluded that same-sex couples and their children are likely to benefit in numerous ways from legal recognition of their families, and providing such recognition through marriage will bestow greater benefit than civil unions or domestic partnerships.²⁵

Research indicates that many gay men and lesbians want and have committed relationships. For example, survey data indicate that between 40% and 60% of gay men and between 45% and 80% of lesbians are currently involved in a romantic relationship. Further, data from the 2000 United States Census indicate that of the 5.5 million couples who were living together but not married, about 1 in 9 (594,391) had partners of the same sex.

Despite persuasive evidence that gay men and lesbians have committed relationships, three concerns about same-sex couples are often raised. A first concern is that the relationships of gay men and lesbians are dysfunctional and unhappy. To the contrary, studies that have compared partners from same-sex couples to partners from heterosexual couples on standardized measures of relationship quality (such as satisfaction and commitment) have found partners from same-sex and heterosexual couples to be equivalent to each other.

A second concern is that the relationships of gay men and lesbians are unstable. However, research indicates that, despite the somewhat hostile social climate within which same-sex relationships develop, many lesbians and gay men have formed durable relationships. For example, survey data indicate that between 18% and 28% of gay couples and between 8% and 21% of lesbian couples have lived together 10 or more years.

A third concern is that the processes that affect the well-being and permanence of the relationships of lesbian and gay persons are different from those that affect the relationships of heterosexual persons. In fact, research has found that the factors that predict relationship satisfaction, relationship commitment, and relationship stability are remarkably similar for both same-sex cohabiting couples and heterosexual married couples.²⁶