Romanian Parliament Blocks Civil Union Bill

A bill that would have extended civil unions to same-sex and opposite-sex couples in Romania was blocked last week by the Juridicial Commission of the country’s lower house Chamber of Deputies, Stiri pentru viata reports.

One of the more vocal opponents of the legislation, MP Diana Tusha, delivered an intervention last month in front of her fellow lawmakers in which she expressed her views that the bill was antithetical to Romanian values and tradition.  

Said Tusha:

 

Despite appearances, civil partnership is not about simple fiscal or housing benefits for unmarried heterosexual and homosexual couples, but about the very definition of family and therefore about its future.

For the first time in Romania’s history, somebody tries to shift the focus of this institution from monogamous heterosexual marriage to a simple – I quote: ‘non-discriminatory’; end of quotation – civil contract between two persons regardless of their sex. […]

We have the terrible example of countries like France, Spain and England, where this attack went so far that the government, after legislating for marriage, adoptive filiation and assisted reproduction for same-sex couples, also replaced the words ‘mother’ and ‘father’ in the civil status registries with the allegedly more neutral terms of ‘parent A’ or ‘parent B’.

It’s hard to imagine a graver aggression towards nature and ultimately also against citizens.

And since we’ve mentioned the citizens, we are here to represent the majority of Romanians, who believe that family based on marriage between [persons of opposite] sexes is the first and foremost centre of social life.

Tusha went on to use the right-wing Arizona brand of logic by saying that while she as a Christian is opposed to discrimination, it doesn't really count as discrimination when you're limiting the rights of gays.

Civil unions not the same as marriage when it comes to federal benefits

Same-sex couples in a civil union will not be eligible for most federal benefits now available to married, same-sex couples. In a series of memos released last week, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) announced that same-sex or other couples who are not legally married “will remain ineligible for most federal benefits programs,” although any existing benefits provided to domestic partners “will remain intact.”

The announcement means that the federal government will treat civil unions differently than legal same-sex marriages.

The action by OPM follows the June 26 decision by the Supreme Court which ruled Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. That section of DOMA prohibited the government from recognizing same-sex marriage for purposes of federal benefits programs.

In a memo to federal benefits administrators, John O’Brien, OMP’s Director for Healthcare and Insurance, outlined changes in the status of federal benefits as a result of the DOMA ruling, noting that guidelines will apply to all federal workers, regardless of whether they live in states that have banned same-sex marriage.

That means same sex couples living anywhere in the U.S. will qualify for federal-employee benefits as long as they hold marriage licenses from any of the 13 states or the District of Columbia, where same-sex marriage is legal.

The Supreme Court ruling and announcement by OPM invalidate the often used argument by lawmakers opposed to same-sex marriage that civil unions offer the same benefits as marriage, without the title.

Currently, Colorado, Illinois, Hawaii, and New Jersey allow same-sex civil unions.

 

OPM acknowledged Tuesday that treatment for benefits of same-sex couples and domestic partners outside the federal workforce, including with Social Security, tax and veterans’ benefits have not yet been established.

OPM has given legally married same-sex couples until August 26 to apply for federal-employee benefits and two years to change their status for retirement benefits.