Editing Civil union (section)

==Overview and terminology==
[[File:New York City Proposition 8 Protest outside LDS temple 20.jpg|thumb|The notion of civil unions is rejected by some, such as this protester at a large demonstration in New York City against [[California Proposition 8 (2008)|California Proposition 8]].<ref name=Towleroad>[http://www.towleroad.com/2008/11/we-did-it.html NYC Protest and Civil Rights March Opposing Proposition 8], [[Andy Towle]], Towelroad.com, November 13, 2008; accessed November 14, 2008.</ref>]]
The terms used to designate civil unions are not standardised and vary widely from country to country.  Government-sanctioned relationships that may be similar or equivalent to civil unions include [[Civil partnership in the United Kingdom|civil partnerships]], [[Registered partnership in the Czech Republic|registered partnerships]], [[domestic partnership]]s, [[Domestic partnership in Tasmania|significant relationships]], [[Reciprocal beneficiary relationships in Hawaii|reciprocal beneficiary relationships]], [[common-law marriage]], [[Adult interdependent relationship in Alberta|adult interdependent relationships]], [[Recognition of same-sex unions in Germany|life partnerships]], [[Recognition of same-sex unions in Andorra|stable unions]], [[civil solidarity pact]]s, and so on. The exact level of rights, benefits, obligations, and responsibilities also varies, depending on the laws of a particular country. Some jurisdictions allow same-sex couples to adopt, while others forbid them to do so, or allow adoption only in specified circumstances.

In the [[United States]], the term ''civil union'' was introduced in the state of [[Same-sex marriage in Vermont|Vermont]] in 2000 to connote a status equivalent to marriage for same-sex couples; it was chosen by the state's legislators in preference to phrases such as  "domestic partner relationship" or "civil accord".<ref>{{cite news |last1=Halloran |first1=Liz |title=How Vermont's 'Civil' War Fueled The Gay Marriage Movement |url=https://www.npr.org/2013/03/27/174651233/how-vermonts-civil-war-fueled-the-gay-marriage-movement |access-date=July 6, 2021 |work=NPR |agency=National Public Radio |date=March 23, 2013 |language=en}}</ref>

''[[Domestic partnership]]'', offered by some states, counties, cities, and employers since as early as 1985,<ref name='buddy062907'>{{cite web|url=http://www.buddybuddy.com/d-p-gov.html |title=Governments Offering Benefits |access-date=2007-07-31 |date=2007-06-29 |publisher=Partners Task Force for Gay & Lesbian Couples }}</ref> has generally connoted a lesser status with fewer benefits.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocServer/Relationship_Recognition_Update_-_09_03_08.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081203035743/http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocServer/Relationship_Recognition_Update_-_09_03_08.pdf|url-status=dead|title=Marriage, Domestic Partnerships, and Civil Unions: An Overview of Relationship Recognition for Same-Sex Couples in the United States|archive-date=December 3, 2008}}</ref>  However, the legislatures of the [[West Coast of the United States|West Coast]] states of [[Domestic partnership in California|California]], [[Domestic partnership in Oregon|Oregon]] and [[Domestic partnership in Washington (state)|Washington]] have preferred the term ''domestic partnership'' for enactments similar or equivalent to civil union laws in [[East Coast of the United States|East Coast]] states.

Civil unions are not seen as a replacement for marriage by many in the LGBT community. "[[Marriage]] in the United States is a civil union; but a civil union, as it has come to be called, is not marriage", said [[Evan Wolfson]] of [[Freedom to Marry]].<ref>[[n:Interview with gay marriage movement founder Evan Wolfson|Interview with Evan Wolfson]], David Shankbone, September 30, 2007</ref>  "It is a proposed hypothetical legal mechanism, since it doesn't exist in most places, to give some of the protections but also withhold something precious from gay people. There's no good reason to do that."  However, some opponents of same-sex marriage claim that civil unions rob marriage of its unique status; Randy Thomasson, executive director of the Campaign for California Families, calls civil unions "homosexual marriage by another name" and contends that civil unions provide same-sex couples "all the rights of marriage available under state law".<ref name="bushirks">{{cite web|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna6338458|title=Bush's gay union stance irks conservatives|website=[[NBC News]]|date=26 October 2004}}</ref>  The California Supreme Court, in the [[In Re Marriage Cases]] decision, noted nine differences<ref name="irmf24"/> in state law.

Civil unions are commonly criticised as being '[[separate but equal]]'; critics such as former [[New Zealand]] MP and feminist [[Marilyn Waring]] note that same-sex couples remain excluded from the right to marry and are forced to use a separate institution.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0410/S00234.htm|title=Civil Unions "Anathema" to Marilyn Waring|date=October 23, 2004|work=Scoop|access-date= June 12, 2010}}</ref> Supporters of same-sex marriage contend that treating same-sex couples differently from other couples under the law allows for inferior treatment and that if civil unions were the same as marriage there would be no reason for two separate laws. A New Jersey commission which reviewed the state's civil union law reported that the law "invites and encourages unequal treatment of same-sex couples and their children".<ref name="hammond2009">{{Cite news|url=http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/04/21/2009-04-21_why_civil_unions_arent_enough_in_gay_marriage_debate_separate_but_equal_wont_cut.html|title=Marriage is more perfect union: In gay marriage debate, separate but equal won't cut it|last=Hammond|first=Bill|work=Ny Daily News|date=April 20, 2009|access-date=June 12, 2010|location=New York|archive-date=September 25, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110925080454/http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/04/21/2009-04-21_why_civil_unions_arent_enough_in_gay_marriage_debate_separate_but_equal_wont_cut.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> Some have suggested that creating civil unions which are open to opposite-sex couples would avoid the accusations of apartheid.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.indegayforum.org/news/show/26950.html |title=The Case for Federal Civil Unions |last=Swayne |first=Steven |work=Independent Gay Forum |date=February 28, 2004 |access-date=June 12, 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100613050003/http://indegayforum.org/news/show/26950.html |archive-date=June 13, 2010 }}</ref>

Proponents of civil unions say that they provide practical equality for same-sex couples and solve the problems over areas such as hospital visitation rights and transfer of property caused by lack of legal recognition.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=27532 |title=Obama: Sermon on the Mount supports gay civil unions |work=Baptist Press |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110425083108/http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=27532 |archive-date=2011-04-25 }}</ref> Proponents also say that creating civil unions is a more pragmatic way to ensure that same-sex couples have legal rights as it avoids the more controversial issues surrounding marriage and the claim that the term has a religious source.

Many supporters of same-sex marriage state that the word 'marriage' matters and that the term 'civil union' (and its equivalents) do not convey the emotional meaning or bring the respect that comes with marriage.<ref name="hammond2009"/><ref>{{Cite magazine|url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040216-588877,00.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050306023600/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040216-588877,00.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=March 6, 2005|title=Why The M Word Matters To Me|last=Sullivan|first=Andrew|date=February 8, 2004|access-date=June 12, 2010 | magazine=Time}}</ref> Former US Solicitor General and attorney in the ''[[Perry v. Schwarzenegger]]'' case [[Theodore Olsen]] said that recognizing same-sex couples under the term 'domestic partnership' stigmatizes gay people's relationships, treating them as if they were "something akin to a commercial venture, not a loving union".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.equalrightsfoundation.org/news/text-of-ted-olsons-opening-statement-in-prop-8-trial-as-prepared/|title=Text of Ted Olson's Opening Statement in Prop. 8 Trial – As Prepared|work=Equal Rights Foundation|access-date=June 12, 2010|date=January 11, 2010}}</ref> Many also contend that the fact that civil unions are often not understood can cause difficulty for same-sex couples in emergency situations.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/04/why_the_word_marriage_matters.html|title=Why the word "marriage" matters|work=Oregon Live|last=Kitch|first=Mary|date=April 21, 2009|access-date=June 12, 2010}}</ref>