Showing posts with label civil unions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label civil unions. Show all posts

Friday, March 4, 2011

Civil Unions for All?

In a report at MyFoxDC, Del. Alston's position has been clarified considerably. Alston wishes to do away with marriage altogether, and have Maryland recognize only civil unions.
"I believe, as a government, we should issue something that is the same for everybody... And I think, if we wanted to issue a license to everybody and call it a civil union license. And then everybody in the state - whether heterosexual or homosexual - would get the same exact license."
This position clarification makes clear that she recognizes that it would be discriminatory to have marriage for one group and civil unions for another - there would be no separate but equal issue as I wrote about yesterday. But, have we really come to this? Is Alston really saying that she would rather see "marriage" cease to exist in Maryland than extend the right to marry to same sex couples? Following the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending racial segregation in public schools many state and local governments resisted integration. The Virginia Assembly passed laws allowing the governor to close integrated schools. In Prince Edward County Virginia every public school in the county was closed to avoid integration.

This is just not the path we should be following.

And let me be clear, I am not equating the conditions of racial segregation to the marriage/civil union issue, rather I am equating the basic concept of providing separate institutions or provisions based on a decision that a designated class of people are not deserving of the same rights and protections afforded to most. Civil unions, whether for same sex couples or for everyone, only make sense in a world where same sex couples are considered to be unworthy of the institution of marriage.

A new poll from Pew finds that public support has been rising every year and at present 45% support it and 46% oppose. But when considering polls that provide respondents with a choice between Opposing same sex marriage, Supporting same sex marriage, or Supporting civil unions, an average of poll responses compiled by Charles Franklin shows a clear plurality now supports same sex marriage. In the span of only 4 years support for same sex marriage has moved from a third place finish among those three options to the preferred option.

The American people are clearly moving in the direction of outright support for marriage equality - Maryland has the chance to be on the leading edge of that trend. Ending marriage and replacing it with civil unions would not be a step forward, it would be a step behind.

Thursday, March 3, 2011

Separate but Equal in Maryland, Roger Taney Would be so Proud

Update: Del. Alston's position has been clarified - she would end marriage in Maryland and replace it with civili unions for all - please see my updated post. This certainly negates the separate but equal issue, but does not really resolve much of anything.

As a follow up to her decision to reconsider supporting a marriage equality bill that she co-sponsored, Del. Tiffany Alston says that she has found the solution - an amendment that would offer civil unions instead. "I have what I believe to be a solution..." Alston reportedly said.

Civil Unions is not an altogether new solution, 100 years ago we referred to such solutions as "separate but equal." Under the guise of separate but equal, African-Americans were entitled to receive the very same public services and accommodations as whites - public schools, bathrooms, water fountains - but states were free to provide different facilities for each. The U.S. Supreme Court endorsed the policy in 1896 in Plessy v. Ferguson and six decades of legal segregation followed - until a later court, in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, acknowledged what everyone knew: separate but equal was anything but equal.

If Maryland decides as a matter of law that heterosexual couples can marry, but homosexual couples must enter civil unions then it will take the coward's way out and declare that separate but equal is an acceptable public policy - at least the state would be living up to the legacy of native son Roger Taney - former member of the House of Delegates, former state senator, and, as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, author of the infamous Dred Scott decision - but is that the legacy Del. Alston, or any other member of the assembly, wants to leave?