Illinois Civil unions aren't just for same-sex couples

[Radical Activist]

I told my girlfriend about this and she didn't believe me. :shrug:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-heterosexuals-civil-unions-12020101202,0,571376.story

He said some senior citizens lobbied for the bill. Seniors with survivor's benefits from Social Security or a pension could lose that income if they remarry. A civil union allows them to keep that benefit while providing the same state-level rights as a marriage.
"If you go to a senior building, you'll find a lot of people who face this dilemma," Harris said. "They may be the largest single group of beneficiaries by number."

In a 2009 article in Elder Law Journal, Chicago attorney John Schleppenbach wrote that Illinois would be nearly unique if it offered civil unions to straight couples, making the bill of "vital importance" to seniors who risked losing benefits by getting married.

Andrew Koppelman, a professor of law and political science at Northwestern University, said civil unions also provide straight couples with an option that gives them legal support but doesn't carry the title of "marriage."

"There are some who think marriage is an anachronistic and patriarchal institution," he said. "It's got this administrative dimension, which provides for hospital visitation rights and inheritance rights and that sort of thing, and then also it includes this symbolic status. Well, there are some people who like the symbolic status and some people who don't."

[dsc]

1. which is why they don't work as a compromise

the difference in level of support between letting gays marry and letting them have civil unions is largely made up of beneficiaries of having a non marriage alternative.

[Radical Activist]

3. I'm not sure I see your point.

The civil unions bill barely passed. A same-sex marriage bill would have failed. There's no doubt that a marriage bill would be better, but I don't know anyone who thinks it would have been better to pass nothing at all.

[dsc]

4. because it will never lead to marriage

there is now an interest in having civil unions which would be eliminated if we gave gays marriage.

[jaxx]

5. No, this is a huge step forward.

And the bill making civil unions available to everyone is good.

[dsc]

8. It is a step forward

but gays will now never get marriage in Ill unless via judical decision. You now have a massive constituency for the civil unions precisely because they are a middle step. Incidently watch support for these dry up if the feds give them the rights and responsibilities of marriage making them useless to the elderly now using them.

[jaxx]

10. I don't think that is correct.

No one knows that gays will never get marriage in IL. Projecting negativity isn't going to help anything and will only spread misinformation. The law has been passed, the governor will sign it, and the future is better for it.

[Radical Activist]

7. oh!

I guess that's possible but I don't see it as being mutually exclusive. There's nothing about repealing DOMA or passing a federal same-sex marriage law that would necessarily invalidate the Illinois civil union law. There would be both marriage and civil unions for both gay and straight couples. Everyone could have exactly the kind of partnership they want.

[jaxx]

2. I think it's great that anyone can have a civil union and get the same

benefits. Thanks for a really informative post.

[Radical Activist]

6. I imagine it avoided an inevitable court case.

Eventually someone would have sued over it.

[dsc]

9. actually someone already did

and they were told, rightly, to go pound sand. The article mentions the suit at the end. An unmarried woman working for the Chicago schools sued when they denied her unmarried partner benefits after offering them to gay couples. She deservedly lost, all she had to do was get married to get the benefits.

[Radical Activist]

11. More evidence that there would have been a similar case

over the civil union law, since that earlier suit wasn't specifically about civil unions. The bill being passed this way avoids that issue.

Greg Harris is a smart guy. The fact that seniors were calling their state Reps in FAVOR of a civil unions bill is political genius.

[dsc]

12. but that can't work on the federal level

since the entire reason those seniors find this to be a useful arrangement is the lack of federal (ie social security) rights. Once the feds accept civil unions they lose their utility for these people.

[Radical Activist]

13. Good point. It was a good strategy for getting it passed in IL,

but it can't be used federally.