Evidence for God from Science

A Primer on Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships, and Defense of Marriage Acts

Definitions
“Same-sex marriage” means legal marriage between people of the same sex.

* Only Massachusetts issues marriage licenses to same-sex couples (since 2004).

“Civil union” is a new category of law that was created to extend rights to same-sex couples. These rights are recognized only in the state where the couple resides. Because civil union law is new, it is largely untested by the courts and is not widely understood.

* Only Vermont offers civil unions (since 2000). A civil union confers state-level spousal rights to same-sex couples while they reside in the state.

“Domestic partnership” is a new category of law that was created to extend rights to unmarried couples, including (but not necessarily limited to) same-sex couples. Laws vary among states, cities, and counties. Terminology also varies; for example, Hawaii has “reciprocal beneficiaries law.” Any rights are recognized only on the state or local level.

* Statewide laws in California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, and New Jersey and district-wide laws in the District of Columbia confer certain spousal rights to same-sex couples.

What's the Difference?
The most significant difference between marriage and civil unions (or domestic partnerships) is that only marriage offers federal benefits and protections.

According to the federal government's General Accounting Office (GAO), more than 1,100 rights and protections are conferred to U.S. citizens upon marriage. Areas affected include Social Security benefits, veterans' benefits, health insurance, Medicaid, hospital visitation, estate taxes, retirement savings, pensions, family leave, and immigration law.

Because civil unions and domestic partnerships are not federally recognized, any benefits available at the state or local level are subject to federal taxation. For example, a woman whose health insurance covers her female partner must pay federal taxes on the total employer cost for that insurance.

Federal Legislation: DOMA
In 1996, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. It allows each state to choose whether or not to recognize a same-sex union that is recognized in another state—thus allowing a choice of whether to enforce the U.S. Constitution's “full faith and credit” clause (which requires each state to recognize the laws and legal contracts of other states). It also creates a federal definition of marriage as a union of a man and a woman.

However, DOMA has yet to be fully tested in the courts. Because the U.S. Constitution does not give Congress the power to limit the scope of the “full faith and credit” clause—only to enforce its application—the constitutionality of DOMA has not been proven.

State Legislation
Since DOMA was passed in 1996, almost every state has passed similar legislation. But if same-sex marriage was not legal, why enact legislation against it?

State legislation against same-sex marriage serves two purposes. One, it writes into law a state's tradition of limiting marriage licenses to opposite-sex couples. Two, it may be used in efforts to overrule existing state or local rights and protections for same-sex couples and their children.

* By 2003, 38 states had passed laws or constitutional amendments that either defined marriage as a union of one man and one woman or which outlawed recognition of same-sex unions. In Nov. 2004 elections, 11 states held referendums on whether marriage should be limited to heterosexual couples; all 11 referendums passed. Currently, 49 states have laws defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

Federal Marriage Amendment
Because the constitutionality of DOMA and state legislation against same-sex marriage has yet to be fully tested by the courts, relying on legislation to settle the issue of same-sex marriage will take years. As a result, text for a proposed constitutional amendment known as the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) was introduced to Congress in 2003.

The amendment would define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and could be used to overrule state or local protections for same-sex couples and their children. To become part of the U.S. Constitution, the FMA would need to be approved by two thirds of Congress and then ratified by three fourths of state legislatures.

Around the World
Countries that issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples: Belgium (2003) and the Netherlands (since 2001); the Canadian provinces of Ontario and British Columbia since 2003, and Quebec, the Yukon, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and Saskatchewan since 2004.

Countries that offer a legal status, sometimes known as registered partnership, that confers most or all spousal rights to same-sex couples: Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Norway, Sweden.

Countries that offer a legal status, sometimes known as unregistered cohabitation, that confers certain spousal rights to same-sex couples (and, in some of these countries, unmarried opposite-sex couples): Brazil, Canada, Croatia, France, Hungary, Israel, New Zealand, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland.

ochotseat wrote:A Primer on Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships, and Defense of Marriage Acts

Definitions
“Same-sex marriage” means legal marriage between people of the same sex.

* Only Massachusetts issues marriage licenses to same-sex couples (since 2004).

“Civil union” is a new category of law that was created to extend rights to same-sex couples. These rights are recognized only in the state where the couple resides. Because civil union law is new, it is largely untested by the courts and is not widely understood.

* Only Vermont offers civil unions (since 2000). A civil union confers state-level spousal rights to same-sex couples while they reside in the state.

“Domestic partnership” is a new category of law that was created to extend rights to unmarried couples, including (but not necessarily limited to) same-sex couples. Laws vary among states, cities, and counties. Terminology also varies; for example, Hawaii has “reciprocal beneficiaries law.” Any rights are recognized only on the state or local level.

* Statewide laws in California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, and New Jersey and district-wide laws in the District of Columbia confer certain spousal rights to same-sex couples.

What's the Difference?
The most significant difference between marriage and civil unions (or domestic partnerships) is that only marriage offers federal benefits and protections.

According to the federal government's General Accounting Office (GAO), more than 1,100 rights and protections are conferred to U.S. citizens upon marriage. Areas affected include Social Security benefits, veterans' benefits, health insurance, Medicaid, hospital visitation, estate taxes, retirement savings, pensions, family leave, and immigration law.

Because civil unions and domestic partnerships are not federally recognized, any benefits available at the state or local level are subject to federal taxation. For example, a woman whose health insurance covers her female partner must pay federal taxes on the total employer cost for that insurance.

Federal Legislation: DOMA
In 1996, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. It allows each state to choose whether or not to recognize a same-sex union that is recognized in another state—thus allowing a choice of whether to enforce the U.S. Constitution's “full faith and credit” clause (which requires each state to recognize the laws and legal contracts of other states). It also creates a federal definition of marriage as a union of a man and a woman.

However, DOMA has yet to be fully tested in the courts. Because the U.S. Constitution does not give Congress the power to limit the scope of the “full faith and credit” clause—only to enforce its application—the constitutionality of DOMA has not been proven.

State Legislation
Since DOMA was passed in 1996, almost every state has passed similar legislation. But if same-sex marriage was not legal, why enact legislation against it?

State legislation against same-sex marriage serves two purposes. One, it writes into law a state's tradition of limiting marriage licenses to opposite-sex couples. Two, it may be used in efforts to overrule existing state or local rights and protections for same-sex couples and their children.

* By 2003, 38 states had passed laws or constitutional amendments that either defined marriage as a union of one man and one woman or which outlawed recognition of same-sex unions. In Nov. 2004 elections, 11 states held referendums on whether marriage should be limited to heterosexual couples; all 11 referendums passed. Currently, 49 states have laws defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

Federal Marriage Amendment
Because the constitutionality of DOMA and state legislation against same-sex marriage has yet to be fully tested by the courts, relying on legislation to settle the issue of same-sex marriage will take years. As a result, text for a proposed constitutional amendment known as the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) was introduced to Congress in 2003.

The amendment would define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and could be used to overrule state or local protections for same-sex couples and their children. To become part of the U.S. Constitution, the FMA would need to be approved by two thirds of Congress and then ratified by three fourths of state legislatures.

Around the World
Countries that issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples: Belgium (2003) and the Netherlands (since 2001); the Canadian provinces of Ontario and British Columbia since 2003, and Quebec, the Yukon, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and Saskatchewan since 2004.

Countries that offer a legal status, sometimes known as registered partnership, that confers most or all spousal rights to same-sex couples: Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Norway, Sweden.

Countries that offer a legal status, sometimes known as unregistered cohabitation, that confers certain spousal rights to same-sex couples (and, in some of these countries, unmarried opposite-sex couples): Brazil, Canada, Croatia, France, Hungary, Israel, New Zealand, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland.

As of now only the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada (except Alberta), and Massachusetts have legalized gay and lesbian marriage. Is the movement to legalize same sex marriage a genuine campaign for only gaining equal rights? No. Queer activists are trying to use homosexual marriage as a tool to convince society to accept homosexuality as an equivalent and alternative form of sexual orientation to heterosexuality.

Ugh.

And people wonder why the Muslims think the West is the "Great Satan"...

Forge wrote:Ugh.
And people wonder why the Muslims think the West is the "Great Satan"...

That's because the Church lost its governmental powers after the Middle Ages. That naturally allows laws to deviate from our Christian heritage. It seems that Islamic states are now on their way to straying from being theocracies, which means that more and more Muslims will demand rights including homosexual marriage.

The West, particularly the United States, is in a culture war between our conservatives and liberals. The moderates are stuck in-between.

People weren't tolerant of homosexuality and premarital sex even in the 20th century, but the sexual revolution of the 1960's helped change that.

Well, I was thinking more of abortion, homosexual "rights", sexual promiscuity, extreme capitalist greed, and the like.

“Civil union” is a new category of law that was created to extend rights to same-sex couples. These rights are recognized only in the state where the couple resides. Because civil union law is new, it is largely untested by the courts and is not widely understood.

Hey, what rights? Homosexuals have the same rights as everyone else-just like me, they can marry a beautiful/handsome person of the opposite sex.

Forge wrote:Well, I was thinking more of abortion, homosexual "rights", sexual promiscuity, extreme capitalist greed, and the like.

And I explained why much of society is more tolerant of those things today. You probably agree that capitalism is the best economic system that exists. Anyway, we don't have total capitalism in the U.S., because we are a mixed economy. In fact, we may be too socialist at this moment.

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote: Hey, what rights? Homosexuals have the same rights as everyone else-just like me, they can marry a beautiful/handsome person of the opposite sex.

Well, they want more and more rights with time. Since most states don't have laws that prohibit employers from firing homosexual employees just for being queer, some homosexual activists want the Civil Rights Act to protect gays and lesbians too. Some of them feel that civil unions aren't enough because civil unions are only effective in the state that's offering them, civil unions don't have as many benefits as marriage, and civil unions don't take place in tabernacles.

Unfortunately, homosexual marriage may soon become a reality in more states, particularly ones with large cities, because Generation X and Y are more tolerant of homosexuality much like the Baby Boomers were more accepting of premarital sex.

The activist judges will have a field day with this.

Canada has not Fully accepted Homosexual Marriage. It is still being brought forth to the Government. It has to pass through the Government 3 times before it can be accepted as a constitutional Change. It will Eventually hurt our Country as it has many Countries. A lot of people have asked how will this affect me? How will it affect my Marriage and my Children. Those questions are valid HOWEVER even Darwinism is against Gay Marriage WHY you might want to know because it is Un-Natural and it does not allow the Continuing of our Race! Morally it is not acceptable because Marriage is an INSTITUTE between Man and Woman! Those Questions above can be answered this way. It might not affect people NOW but it will affect your Children, and Children's Children. It is a terrible situation in our Country right now and as the movement spreads there will be problems with Churches and Christians in particular as we will not be giving Equality to them.

i still think we should grant them a legal union of some sort.

Prodigal Son wrote:i still think we should grant them a legal union of some sort.

See I do not mind that. I just do not like the Idea of Legalizing the Act of Marriage for them. Marriage is Man and Woman Coming together to form a Union!

bizzt wrote:Canada has not Fully accepted Homosexual Marriage. It is still being brought forth to the Government. It has to pass through the Government 3 times before it can be accepted as a constitutional Change. It will Eventually hurt our Country as it has many Countries.

Didn't you read the religioustolerance article? As of now, homosexual marriage certificates are being issued in Canada except Alberta. Your country is more lenient toward homosexuals, so it may be safe to predict that same sex marriage will soon be a reality there.

Prodigal Son wrote:i still think we should grant them a legal union of some sort.

You mean civil unions?
They can just live together you know.

ochotseat wrote:

bizzt wrote:Canada has not Fully accepted Homosexual Marriage. It is still being brought forth to the Government. It has to pass through the Government 3 times before it can be accepted as a constitutional Change. It will Eventually hurt our Country as it has many Countries.

Didn't you read the religioustolerance article? As of now, homosexual marriage certificates are being issued in Canada except Alberta. Your country is more lenient toward homosexuals, so it may be safe to predict that same sex marriage will soon be a reality there.

Yes Marriage Certificates are being Handed out HOWEVER they are not legalized as of yet. The Federal Government has not put this through the House of Commons as of yet and it still has to hit the Senate before the Bill will be passed!

bizzt wrote: Yes Marriage Certificates are being Handed out HOWEVER they are not legalized as of yet. The Federal Government has not put this through the House of Commons as of yet and it still has to hit the Senate before the Bill will be passed

Except for Alberta, isn't there any other opposition to same sex marriage there? Is Canada trying to emulate the Netherlands now?

ochotseat wrote:

bizzt wrote: Yes Marriage Certificates are being Handed out HOWEVER they are not legalized as of yet. The Federal Government has not put this through the House of Commons as of yet and it still has to hit the Senate before the Bill will be passed

Except for Alberta, isn't there any other opposition to same sex marriage there? Is Canada trying to emulate the Netherlands now?

There is opposition but Alberta is the Only Province that does not recognize nor gives Marriage Certificates. I hope Canada is not trying to emulate the Netherlands! I wish they would Emulate the Australians and have a little backbone against these types of Marriages!