The Road to Equality
In 2011, Illinois passed strong civil unions, a so-called "everything but marriage" law, through the state legislature called the Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act. Yet almost immediately, problems with civil unions arose. There was a drawn-out legal battle between Catholic Charities and the state of Illinois over the $30 million in taxpayer dollars that the religious charity received for foster care and adoption services, and their refusal to grant those services to same-sex couples in civil unions, which ended in a loss for the church.
Civil unions created a lower class of recognition that, while providing much-needed rights and protections, reinforced the idea that LGBT relationships were less than their heterosexual counterparts. Creating this new, separate, and different level of rights and recognition among committed couples only created further inequity, confusion, and discord.
Such was the case when the Springfield, Illinois Joint Labor/Management Insurance Committee deciding not to cover health benefits for the civil union partners of city employees. The committee used the different relationship status of same-sex couples and married heterosexual couples to carve out the exemption to civil union spouses. They cited the benefits for same-sex couples being too costly, which is an argument that would never be accepted when applied to a more universally understood institution like full marriage. Public outrage eventually made them change their decision and cover all couples equally.
Perhaps the most illuminating example was confusing decision from the Illinois Department of Revenue saying that couples in civil unions "may not file joint Illinois returns" and that the new civil unions law "did not change the Illinois income tax laws." After much pushing from legislators and the community, the department reversed their decision, allowing same-sex couples in civil unions to file jointly in the state. Yet this confusion within the state government itself over the law shows just how easy it is for civil unions to fall short.
Perhaps the most illuminating example was confusing decision from the Illinois Department of Revenue saying that couples in civil unions "may not file joint Illinois returns" and that the new civil unions law "did not change the Illinois income tax laws." After much pushing from legislators and the community, the department reversed their decision, allowing same-sex couples in civil unions to file jointly in the state. Yet this confusion within the state government itself over the law shows just how easy it is for civil unions to fall short.
In a show of just how unequal civil unions were, 25 gay and lesbian couples represented by Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois brought a lawsuit seeking to overturn Illinois' 16-year-old ban on same-sex marriages. Now that the law they are challenging has been altered in the way they were seeking, however, expect the lawsuit to be dismissed.
In fact, research has shown that in area after area -- whether tax law, health insurance, hospitalization, family issues, personal finance or actions by state and local officials -- same-sex couples, even ones in civil unions, were treated unequally or denied their basic rights, or singled out for discrimination.
It quickly became clear that while civil unions could be considered a first step, it could never be an end goal. As openly gay Illinois State Representative Sam Yingling said during the SB10 debate, "This is a very simple issue. It's about family. Your family. My family. We feel pain when our kids feel pain. We strive to make sure they have every opportunity your kids have. But we are a family treated differently under the law. We do not have the same protections that your families have."