Myth: Gays and lesbians are discriminated against in New York and are deprived of the right to marry.

Reality: Discrimination against persons who engage in homosexual behavior has been illegal in New York since 2003. Also, unmarried New Yorkers currently enjoy the right to marry a consenting, unrelated adult of the opposite sex; there is no inequality. In fact, the Court of Appeals in Hernandez v. Robles ruled that New York’s marriage laws do not violate the state or federal constitutions by limiting marriage to opposite-sex relationships.

Myth: Civil unions are similar to marriages, but not exactly the same.

Reality: A civil union is a legal mechanism by which same-sex couples receive rights and benefits identical to the rights and benefits given married couples under state law. For state law purposes, the only difference between a civil union and a marriage--aside from the name--is that one involves same-sex couples and the other involves opposite-sex couples.

Myth: Here in New York, civil unions would be an effective compromise; they would confer rights and obligations upon same-sex couples without offending certain segments of society by using the term “marriage” to describe same-sex relationships.

Reality: Civil unions are not a compromise. Simply put, civil unions are a thinly veiled attempt to gain public acceptance of same-sex “marriage” through calling it by a different name. New Yorkers who believe in the sanctity of marriage will not fall for this strategy.

Myth: Passing a civil unions law in New York will appease advocates of same-sex “marriage” and will resolve a hot-button issue once and for all.

Reality: The experiences of other states indicate that even if civil unions are legalized, advocates of same-sex “marriage” will likely continue their attempts to redefine marriage. Connecticut passed a civil unions law in 2005. As of this writing, a same-sex “marriage” bill is pending in the Connecticut legislature, and advocates of same-sex “marriage” have filed a lawsuit claiming that Connecticut’s civil unions law is unconstitutional. California’s domestic partnership law provides the rights and benefits of marriage to same-sex couples; there, too, advocates of same-sex “marriage” have sued the state over alleged constitutional violations in the domestic partnership statute.

Myth: Civil unions are the wave of the future, and are being legalized all over the United States. New York is behind the times.

Reality: As of this writing, only five states have legalized same-sex “marriage” and/or civil unions, while a handful of others have domestic partnership laws that are similar to civil unions. On the other hand, more than 40 states have passed laws or state constitutional amendments limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples. There is nothing inevitable about the proposed legalization of same-sex “marriage” or civil unions here in New York.

Myth: Civil unions should be allowed in New York; legalizing such unions will do no harm.

Reality: Civil unions should not be legalized. The passage of civil unions legislation could lead to a host of negative consequences, including:

• Infringement upon the rights and freedoms of religious organizations and employers, who would be forced to recognize civil unions even if doing so would violate their core values;
• Infringement upon the rights and freedoms of judges and justices of the peace, who could be required to solemnize civil unions regardless of their personal beliefs;
• Efforts to obtain legal recognition for polygamous and/or polyamorous relationships;
• Efforts to eradicate the institution of marriage altogether and replace it with a flexible statutory scheme that would allow couples to select from a menu of rights and responsibilities; and
• The use of civil unions as an incremental step toward full legal recognition of same-sex “marriage.”

Most importantly, civil unions represent the affirmative governmental endorsement and approval of family structures that, by their very nature, deprive children of either a mother or a father. Children need both mothers and fathers. The preferences of adults and the agendas of special interest groups must never take priority over the best interests of children.