A case of civil rights

The Iowa Supreme Court on Dec. 9 will begin considering a lawsuit regarding Iowa's law banning same-sex marriage. We think justices must uphold last year's lower-court ruling that it is unconstitutional to deny civil marriage to same-sex couples.

It's a matter of civil rights.

Without the right to marry, committed same-sex partners can't count on the spousal rights married heterosexual couples enjoy. Some examples noted by plaintiffs in this case include the right to have their partner with them during medical procedures, to talk with insurance companies on each others' behalf and to take leave from work when a partner's family member dies.

According to the plaintiffs, the words "husband," "wife," "spouse" or references to "marriage" appear in more than 540 sections of state law.

The right to marry is also important because of the message in the phrase "I'm married," they argued. "Married" denotes, as no other word does, a relationship of mutual commitment and responsibility.

"A lot of people ask me 'why do you want to get married?'" Trish Varnum said in a meeting with The Gazette Editorial Board. "I answer, 'for the same reasons you do.'"

Varnum and her partner, Kate Varnum, both of Cedar Rapids, are among six same-sex couples who are party to the suit against Polk County Recorder Timothy Brien. They are represented by New York-based Lambda Legal, which has assisted in same-sex marriage and equal rights lawsuits across the country.

There were an estimated 5,800 same-sex couples in Iowa as of 2005, according to research by Williams Institute of UCLA. Many of those couples have children, who deserve a stable household with parents who are legally obligated and committed to care for them.

The Iowans represented in Varnum v. Brien have been together at least five and as long as 16 years. Three of the couples are raising children and others plan to do so. They're asking to be bound by the same rights and responsibilities that traditional families have.

Iowa's only legally married same-sex couple, Sean Fritz and Tim McQuillan, celebrated their anniversary this fall. The men married on the single day same-sex marriage was legal in Polk County and are not party to this suit.

But Fritz told reporters that being married changed their relationship.

"You stop thinking six months in the future if we're still going to be together," Fritz was quoted in the AP story. "It's more five, 10 years from now, where are we going to be moving into and getting a house? It's a different perspective on how you approach planning."

Recognizing the right to same-sex marriages would not pave the way to legal expansions such as polygamy. Government has always regulated civil marriage as a two-person agreement. Our laws are structured around two-person unions and parental duties to children. That won't and shouldn't change.

We recognize and respect why many people, because of personal values or their religious faiths, insist the term "marriage" doesn't apply to same-sex partners. But civil marriage is a legal, civil consideration, not a religious one. It deals only with the everyday rights and responsibilities of committed partners.

Even if a civil union provided all the same benefits and legal rights as traditional marriage, the phrase would still not carry the same weight as the word "marriage." Such a term perpetuates the wrong notion that committed same-sex partners are unequal to heterosexual married couples in matters of law.