Alternet Piece Argues Civil Unions for Range of ‘Couples’

Alternet reprinted a piece today from In These Times making the argument that the civil union law that President Obama said his administration will push for “gay couples” should be expanded to any two people who need or want the legal protections currently only given to married couples:

[Civil unions] should be available to any two people, gay or straight, in whatever configuration: Mother and son, grandparent and grandkid, mother and daughter, and best friends should all be able to form legal couples that enjoy the rights, privileges, financial benefits and responsibilities now assigned to marriage. (Calm down Rev. Rick: Only two people, no pets allowed.)

America’s current marriage system, even when it includes same-sex couples, inherently discriminates against millions of people who are not in a sexual relationship. (That many legal marriages are platonic only adds irony to injustice.) Ensuring equal rights for all requires relegating or elevating (however you look at it) marriage to the realm of religion. Kind of like christenings, bar mitzvahs and chicken sacrifice.

The state’s job, then, would be to assign benefits, if any, to couples, but not to define who can enter into coupledom. There is no rational, as opposed to religious, reason why any two people shouldn’t be able to form a civil union that carries the same rights as marriage: to pass on and inherit property, make decisions for the sick, visit inmates and get discounts on Carnival cruises.

QEJ spearheaded a campaign a few years ago called Beyond Marriage, which argued similarly for an expansion of legal protections for a range of families or relationships for whom marriage is not an option, or a desire. However, the Beyond Marriage statement disagrees with this framework is that the focus should not just be focused on “couples,” as there are polyamorous relationships, or other kinds of kinship and care models for which a simple 2-person policy would not be sufficient. What about roommates of 3 or more people? Or queer couples who are jointly raising children with another person or couple? While thinking beyond the civil union as only applicable to gay or conjugal relationships, it is also important to think beyond the “couple” as a framework.