Civil unions steer us away from core issue: equal rights

• Reprints

Updated: August 4, 2011 4:20PM

Imagine: You’ve made it through 25 years of joy and struggle. You and your partner have worked hard to stay together through challenges with health, finance, and maybe even an infidelity. You’ve weathered a thousand storms as a couple. But suddenly your world is turned upside down when you get the dreaded phone call that the person you love most has been rushed to a local hospital in full cardiac arrest. You drop everything and rush to your beloved’s side. But you are stopped at the front desk. You will not be allowed to visit or have any input about treatment. You won’t even be given an update about their condition. Why? Because your partner’s family of origin never approved of the relationship and prefers to deny it exists. How can they get away with that? Until now there was no recognition of civil unions in Illinois, but less than two weeks ago that changed.

On Jan. 31 Gov. Quinn signed historic legislation to allow couples, whether same sex or opposite sex, to enter into civil unions starting June first. I interviewed a couple who will do just that. “Jane” and “Joan” of North Aurora, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told me this is better than no recognition at all, but “it still promotes the idea of second-class status where our LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) relationships are concerned ... This legislation is a step forward, but we haven’t crossed the finish line of full equality yet.”

There are many who say full marriage equality is never an option for religious reasons, but I was surprised by how many residents who weighed in through Facebook and e-mail supported the idea of civil unions. They separated the issues of civil rights and religious sanction. Indeed it can be a tricky dance between the two, where sometimes relationships sanctioned by religious authorities need civil protection. For example: after a 50-year marriage a woman is widowed. She is living on the Social Security her husband earned from a lifetime of hard work. She meets a gentleman her own age who has also lost his spouse and they begin a relationship that looks every bit like a new marriage. But if they marry, she loses her Social Security benefits. They can now apply for a civil union.

I asked Jane and Joan about the misconceptions they see surrounding this issue. They answered that they’re tired of hearing how the LGBT community is asking for special rights. Jane laughed. “We’re only asking for what other couples have. It’s not like we’re asking for someone to pay for our wedding! We want the same rights that already exist for those in a legal marriage, not special rights that aren’t already on the law books. What is so ‘special’ about being by your loved one’s bedside when they are in the hospital? Or filing your taxes jointly instead of as two separate individuals? Or being able to add your loved one to your health insurance plan though work? Or inheritance rights when your lifelong love eventually dies? If we’re not entitled to full equality as hard-working, taxpaying citizens, then do we get a portion of our taxes refunded since we do not get full access to what we pay for?”

She addressed another criticism: “I don’t understand how this will somehow be an added financial burden to the state, since we are taxpaying citizens. If anything, the added revenue from the fees that will be collected at county clerks’ offices statewide should add to the state coffers, in addition to the increase in sales taxes collected for purchases at ceremony-related businesses.”

And finally, addressing the criticism that LGBT people want to push some alternative agenda on people, Joan told me her only agenda is found in Matthew 22:39 where Jesus tells the Pharisees that part of the greatest commandment is to treat others as we wish to be treated. She clarified: “We don’t go around beating up heterosexuals for being hetero. We don’t scream derogatory names at you on the street, we don’t try and strip you of your civil rights, and we don’t even look at you funny if you hold hands with your spouse in public. We just want to be treated the same way we treat you.”

I could tell it was difficult for these women to have to ask for anonymity because fear and misunderstanding is so pervasive. “I’ve got to hide who I am, and I hate it,” Jane said. “I’m torn because I can’t be my whole self.”

I pray for the day when our energy can be spent on eradicating hunger and homelessness rather than deciding who can be denied basic rights — a day when people are measured by their kindness, integrity and work ethic, rather than their color, gender or sexual orientation.

Deena Sherman can be reached at deenasherman@att.net.