Monday, February 19, 2007

Gay Civil Unions in Jersey, Whoo-hoo!

No, it's not real marriage, and it's now in only the third state in fifty.

Still, small victories add up.

Benefits for gay couples start in N.J.
By Nick Petruncio, Asbury Park (N.J.) Press

ASBURY PARK, N.J. — Five gay couples filed civil union applications in the predawn hours Monday in Asbury Park, N.J., as the state law enacted to give gay couples the same rights as heterosexual ones without calling the relationship a marriage went into effect at midnight.

The city was one of a handful of New Jersey municipalities that opened its records offices in the early morning hours so gay couples could apply for licenses and start the required 72-hour waiting period before a civil union ceremony could take place.

"There aren't words to describe how happy we are. It's time for this," said Brett Noorigian, a 31-year-old who came to City Hall with his partner of eight years, Sean O'Dea, 32.

Noorigian called the law a step toward marriage equality.

The New Jersey Supreme Court in October ruled that gay couples in the state were constitutionally entitled to all the benefits of marriage, but left it up to lawmakers to decide the details. Instead of following Massachusetts, the only state that allows gay couples to marry, the state legislature chose to offer civil unions, as Vermont and Connecticut permit.

Thomas Mannix, 44, and Kevin Pilla, 43, were domestic partners in New Jersey. Mannix said he is happy civil unions have been extended to them, but not calling their relationship a marriage is a shortfall.

"It's a second-class status," Mannix said. "It doesn't have the same weight."

However, Richard Clayton, 46, who was applying for a license with his partner of 15 years, Ron Fleckenstein, 43, is not bothered by the difference in terminology.

"It's a big step. I don't find it insulting that it's not called marriage," Clayton said.

To him, marriage is a religious bond between two people and civil unions are for people who want to feel bonded without the religious aspect. The only difference Clayton sees is that he and Fleckenstein cannot file federal income taxes jointly, and that is OK with him.

But to gay-rights advocacy group Garden State Equality, marriage is the only currency people understand.

"Civil unions are like a song with the words but without the music," said Steven Goldstein, the group's chairman.

Goldstein fears that some people in places such as hospitals and schools may not know what "civil union" means.

"Our goal is marriage for gay couples," he said. "We do see that on the horizon in the next two years or less through legislation."

Sarah Branin of Roxbury, N.J., refers to her sister's partner as her wife. Branin came to support and be a witness for Julie Branin, 26, and her partner of three years, Sue Abatemarco, 31.

They already had a ceremony done and were applying for a civil union license to make things official.

"I'm just really happy for them. I'm glad they have equal rights, but I was hoping it would be called marriage," Sarah Branin said.

Degn Schubert, 40, and Mark Rado, 35, moved from California and have been together six years. This is the seventh time the couple has had to go through procedures to have their relationship legally recognized because of obstacles such as changes in laws and resolutions that were non-binding.

"It's a game. You try to do the best that you can," Schubert said. "You know what you mean to each other."

Deputy City Clerk Kiki Tomek opened the office from midnight to about 1 a.m. and planned on being open again during the daylight hours of President's Day, when many government offices are closed.

"The law took effect at midnight, and our residents called and asked if we'd be open, and we take care of our residents," Tomek said.


If it's any consolation, as I've written about myself several times, the real benefits of marriage are the legal ones; legal rights, health benefits, property rights, adoption and child-rearing rights. Whether it's called a "marriage" or a "civil union" makes little difference from that perspective. And, technically, Richard Clayton has a point; any mutual, exclusive relationship that isn't solemnized in a religious ceremony can be considered a "civil union," including the millions of people married by justices of the peace, or by common law. Or, for that matter, myself. My Lovely Wife and I were joined in union by a religious leader (a family friend) who nevertheless conducted a non-religous ceremony that was not in keeping with the tenets of his faith. (Don't ask. Long, complicated story).

No comments:

Post a Comment