If you are anything like me, and you're probably not, then you have been wondering what the differences are between civil unions and gay marriages, and what this distinction might mean in the light of today's historic decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Court. Well, Josh Levin attempts to help us out in Slate.
"In 1999, the Vermont Supreme Court declared that the state was 'constitutionally required to extend to same-sex couples the common benefits and protections that flow from marriage,' but left it to the state legislature to decide how to best remedy the situation. The Vermont legislature passed a bill setting up a parallel institution, the civil union, which conferred the same basic rights and benefits as marriage. The bill was signed in 2000 by Gov. Howard Dean.Posted by Paul Hina at November 19, 2003 12:04 AM
"The Massachusetts court's decision lies somewhere in between. While the ruling does state that preventing gay couples from participating in the institution of marriage violates the state's constitution, it does not require that gay couples be allowed to receive marriage licenses immediately. Instead, the court is staying judgment for 180 days to allow the state legislature to come up with a remedy.
"The options before the state legislature include: approving same-sex marriage; getting rid of civil marriage altogether and replacing it with a type of civil union available to every couple on an equal basis; or doing nothing, in which case on the 181st day, the Massachusetts Superior Court would be required to issue an order implementing the higher court's decision and allowing gay couples to obtain marriage licenses.
"It seems that a civil union bill similar to Vermont's wouldn't fly, as the court ruled that it was discriminatory to prevent a same-sex couple from obtaining a marriage license. It is possible that the legislature could pass some kind of civil union bill, but it remains to be seen if that would pass muster with the court."