Does anyone else think my title sounds awkward? As odd as my title sounds - I think it's interesting because it's a real-life question. The question - "Who will you civilly unionize, Kevin?" was a reader's comment that followed news story over at PamsHouseBlend.com. The story was about Illinois's upcoming vote on Civil Unions. Yep, Illinois is getting into the act. Well, okay, so it's not marriage equality, like many people would prefer but still it's progress. And this bill (HB 2234) would allow same-gender couples and opposite-gender couples to civilly unionize. I still can't believe I'm starting to use this language of "civilly unionizing" because it just sounds so "technical," for lack of a better word. And, I would imagine, some critics would say it's demeaning...
The web-mistress Pam Spaulding reported this news from a story in the WashingtonBlade (a newspaper that covers lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender life). Spaulding explains that activists & Representatives are expecting the Illinois State Senate to vote on Civil Union legislation as early as next week (Tuesday or Wednesday'ish). If that's the case, people could be "civilly unionizing" by the last week of June! The journalist Chris Johnson at the WashBlade explains -
Rick Garcia, political director for Equality Illinois, said Thursday he's "absolutely" expecting the full state House and the Senate to pass a civil union measure either Tuesday or Wednesday. The bill has support from Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn (D).
The House Youth and Family Committee, chaired by Rep. Greg Harris, who's gay, intends to attach an amendment legalizing civil unions to a "shell bill" that's already been approved by the Senate, Garcia said. If the full House votes in favor of the legislation, the bill would be sent to the full Senate within hours for a vote of concurrence.
Garcia said Illinois lawmakers often use "shell bills" to pass legislation expediently. He said it's necessary to legalize civil unions through this method because the legislative session ends May 30 and the approach limits the time that opponents of civil unions can lobby lawmakers.
"We get it out of the House and then senators only have a few hours of being beat up by our opponents rather than three days or a long weekend," he said. "Since there is a perfectly legitimate way of doing it in one day, that's what we're going to do."
The WashBlade story also makes it clear that this bill would not infringe on "religious freedoms," and the law could go into effect within 30 days of the governor signing it. That's pretty darn fast, which is cool. But still, for me personally, I'm of mixed feelings. Of course, I'd want to have fully marriage equality, with all of its rights and responsibilities. I mean, after all, we are living in "equality-land."
Aside of my sarcasm, I also think that this development has good potential for the future. If you look at Vermont, they had Civil Unions before finally receiving "full" marriage rights through their state legislatures. What does that question of "Who would you civilly unionize, Kevin" mean?
If we follow the logical course of reasoning, one could say that this civil unions bill could lead to full marriage equality in Illinois. Yet, some critics would argue that taking baby-steps like this is just taking the wuss's route. I tend to see this situation as a "glass half full" (and not half empty) because I think there are all sorts of good opportunities that could arise from this.
Call me an optimist, but this could open the door to good conversations between neighbors and of course, more rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. But I continue to be fascinated too by the question above. The language of "Who are you going to civilly unionize" is both interesting to me because I'm a gay history buff, but also, I think it sounds clunky and bass-ackwards too.
The so-called "straight-counterpart" of this question would be - "Who are you going to marry, Kevin?" And I think people will eventually realize the ridiculousness of having "separate-but-equal institutions," but I'm wondering when that moment will be. I don't think it'll happen next year, nor in 2011. Will it be after the 2012 elections? Will it be after 2016? Will it be even further out? If I had to make an educated guess, I don't think this country will see "country-wide marriage equality" until somewhere past 2012 at least, but what do you think? When will this country see full marriage equality? Also, would you be willing to civilly unionize (if you got all the state rights), or no?