Vermont Marks Five Years of Civil Unions

April 26, 2005 — -- On a summer day nearly five years ago, Lois Farnham and Holly Puterbaugh made their 27-year relationship official before 200 guests at First Congregational Church in Burlington, Vt.

The occasion was remarkable on several levels. For the women, the ceremony brought legitimacy to their partnership, both legally and emotionally. For the state of Vermont, it was one of the first civil unions of gay couples to be recognized. And for the nation, it helped spark one of the most fiercely debated issues fueling the current culture wars.

"Every once in a while, I step back and say, 'Oh, my gosh, we started all this, didn't we?'" Puterbaugh said. "And in all honesty, I have trouble believing it. I look back and say, 'It's just me,' but then I realize the difference we made and it's wonderful and it's amazing and humbling."

Today is the fifth anniversary of former Gov. Howard Dean signing Vermont's civil union law providing gay men and lesbians with the same legal benefits and protections as married couples. Last year, Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage, and last week, Connecticut became the second state to recognize civil unions.

Perhaps the strongest measure of how far the issue has come is that civil unions, considered so radical in 2000, are now the "conservative" compromise -- providing benefits but still not "real" marriage -- offered by politicians grappling with similar proposals elsewhere.

At the same time, backlash continues to be harsh. Eighteen states -- most recently Kansas earlier this month -- have banned gay marriage in their constitutions, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Residents of Alabama, South Dakota and Tennessee are set to vote on similar ballot measures in 2006, and other states are working toward doing the same.

"States are steadily lining up in support of marriage as it's historically been defined between a man and a woman," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, which has made opposing same-sex marriage a top priority.

"They're counterfeit marriages," Perkins said, adding, "They're a threat to destabilizing the family and society by devaluing the institution of marriage."

Moving Forward in Vermont

In Vermont, life has moved on from the contentiousness of 2000, when the debate about civil unions divided neighbors and the Legislature. During the elections that November, 17 lawmakers who had voted for civil unions lost, and Republicans claimed a majority in the state House for the first time since 1986. Democrats have since regained control.

"What the real story is, five years out, is that it's not a story," said Vermont Secretary of State Deborah Markowitz, adding, "It was passed, it was implemented and the story was over. There's not a debate in the Statehouse, not a debate in neighborhoods, not a debate in families anymore. It has become routine."

In addition, Markowitz noted that Vermont became a gay tourist destination, benefiting inns, caterers, florists and others who provide services for civil unions, though some of the business may be lost to neighboring Massachusetts, where couples can marry.

But that doesn't mean everyone is pleased. Craig Bensen, president of Take It to the People, which lobbied against Vermont's law on moral grounds, said there's not much that opponents can do. The group tried unsuccessfully in 2001 to change the law to be just about benefits and not about spouses, he said, with a bill passing the state House but ultimately failing.

"Since then, the general wisdom from both sides of the argument, elected officials, is, 'It was a hornet's nest the last time, we're not going to touch it,'" said Bensen, who lives in Cambridge, Vt.

Markowitz said a few clerks resigned when they were asked to process licenses for the solemnization of relationships, but most have said it is not their place to judge. Some justices also have resisted, she said, but "across the state there are lots of justices who want to do civil unions, so the ones who don't, by and large, have not been approached."

Through mid-April, there were 7,464 civil unions performed in the state, according to Richard McCoy, public health statistics chief for the Vermont Department of Health. Of those, 1,118 were to Vermont residents, and the rest were for couples from other places.

There also have been 68 dissolutions, which mirror the process of divorces, but the number of breakups is probably higher since only Vermont residents must get legal recognition. "We know that there's vast underreporting because a couple doesn't need to go through a dissolution process in another state," McCoy said.

Advocates say that, much like before the law, gay couples are part of their communities, with civil unions making a difference mainly in their personal lives.

"We've found whether you're talking to churches or Rotary clubs, people have an opportunity to learn about their neighbors," said Beth Robinson, co-founder of the Vermont Freedom to Marry Task Force and an attorney who represented the plaintiffs, including Farnham and Puterbaugh, in Baker v. State, the case that ultimately led to the civil union law.

But Bensen said the number of couples in civil unions is so small that many people have not encountered them. "There are vast areas of the state where it's very hard to find the average person who knows anyone in that category," he said. "We're talking about 1,100 couples with civil unions, total."

Igniting a National Debate

What cannot be argued is the firestorm of controversy that Vermont's civil union law kicked off across the country. In addition to the laws passed in Massachusetts and Connecticut, judges and officials in New York, California and Oregon last year began performing marriages of gay couples. They have since been legally challenged, and the cases are in various stages of appeal.

"All around the country, you're seeing one-on-one conversations around the watercooler changing people's hearts and minds," Robinson said. "You see same-sex couples marrying in Massachusetts, and the sky doesn't fall in. And a few families are a little stronger."

Yet, not only are states passing constitutional bans on same-sex marriage, there is a national movement, supported by President Bush, to change the U.S. Constitution to forbid them as well.

Robinson acknowledged there have been "a lot of unfortunate anti-equality constitutional amendments," but added, "Where folks have the opportunity to have that meaningful dialogue … we're not seeing the kinds of results at the ballot box that some might have suggested."

Markowitz noted that the term civil union, once considered electric, now is used to appease both sides. "In the national debate, it's changed so radically," she said. "Now what we've done in Vermont is considered that conservative fallback. It's not as radical, at the edge. That's very ironic and curious to the rest of us."

But opponents say states that opt for civil unions rather than same-sex marriage are really achieving the same end. "It clearly is out of step with what most states across the country are doing," Perkins said. "This is typical of what politicians would like to do -- they want to please both camps. They want to preserve marriage as the name marriage but give the benefit to another configuration called civil unions, and that ultimately doesn't work."

Robinson agreed -- but for entirely different reasons. "I think that the five-year anniversary of the civil union law is important and worth marking," she said. "But from the perspective of many of us in Vermont, and especially many of the advocates who got us to the point where the civil union law happened, it isn't something that we plan to be celebrating and remembering for years and years to come. It really is a steppingstone to full equality."

Bensen said his group will fight any attempt to create same-sex marriage in Vermont. "We would be opposed to moving in the direction of Massachusetts," he said. "We also think we're darn close there … Except for the federal recognition, Vermont has full gay marriage. At the same time, we're told that we weren't given gay marriage, then they invented civil unions and said we should be happy because we won."

Officially a Family

While advocates in Vermont plan to push for full marriage for gay couples, Farnham and Puterbaugh say that will be someone else's fight. After being in the international spotlight, things are much quieter for Farnham, a nurse, and Puterbaugh, who teaches math at the University of Vermont, as well as their daughter, Kim, now 24.

Though they were never sure they would succeed, Farnham said, it was worth trying to make a change. "We decided that we'd come to the point where we needed to take a stand and the belief that the rest of the country, the state, needed to see that there were people out there who were reflective of, I guess, normal life that were all around," she said. "We're able to hold down jobs, we pay taxes, we're involved in community things."

Puterbaugh said she still is excited about what they accomplished, on two levels: "The legal one is we don't have to worry about, OK, what happens if something happens to one of us and who's the next-of-kin and all the protections that being next-of-kin give us, because up to that point … we were, as far as the law was concerned, total strangers.

"Then there's the emotional, personal level that is so much harder to try to explain," she said. "Because after you've been together over 25 years, you don't think a ceremony or a piece of paper is going to change things, but it did. I was surprised. It's the same way as if you asked any heterosexual couple -- the extra tie, the extra recognition."

Her spouse had a similar sentiment. "It really has made a significant difference, and you wouldn't think a piece of paper would make that much difference after all those years," Farnham said. "It's like a relationship is legitimate and recognized, so that sensation is still there."

If you would like more information about same-sex marriage laws, Click Here.