From guest blogger, Leona.
Some argued that if civil unions can be granted the same benefits and privileges as marriage, there is not point for queer people to pursue marriage equality. In that way, the definition of marriage as a union of a man and a woman will not be challenged and the government granted all citizens equal rights. I would argue that this kind of practice couldn’t be regard as equality. Marriage is a social construct that has its meaning in the word itself. Just two long-term partners taking care of each other and sharing responsibilities is not a marriage. For example, people are not necessarily married to their roommate even though they might be perfect living together and feel fondly of each other. Having/raising children or having the potential to do so is not a necessary requirement of marriage. Two elderlies can get married. It is also not required to have mutual romantic feelings. No one is testing whether two people truly love each other before they get married. Sometimes, romantic feelings diminish through years and people wouldn’t necessarily get a divorce. The power of marriage is just as the power of money. Money has no intrinsic values. 20 bucks is only a piece of paper without the meaning assigned by the society. The numbers in your account would just be numbers but a form of properties. Marriage is a commitment to keep a union. Just like by imposing an imaginary deadline, a person can be more efficient in writing; by getting married, people can be more aware of the union and their obligations in sustaining the family unit. Stable family units are valuable for a society thus should be encouraged. Most societies do not see civil union as equivalent to marriage and the union will not be given the same meaning by the society.