Gay Weddings are Good for Business

So, we know that it's legal and we know that it refers to same-sex couples and we know that it's a civil, not a religious institution.

But what's not mentioned is that it's a separate and unequal institution. Same-sex couples get some of the same rights as married heterosexual partners, but not all.  And civil unions are not recognized by the U.S. federal government.

In the US, civil unions started in Vermont in 2000 and have also been created in New Jersey, New Hampshire and Connecticut.  It's worth noting that all but New Jersey now have legal gay marriage (and it's being debated in New Jersey as I type).  Civil unions are also common in many parts of Europe.

So if civil unions are perceived by governments as a good compromise and avoid the term marriage (which for some has religious implications), then why is there still such a stubborn fight for gay marriage?  I think Portia de Rossi said it well on The View a few weeks ago.  Although the whole interview is good, the part at about 1:15 is particularly compelling:

The bottom line is that civil unions still imply "lesser than" - equal marriage.  And it's not just the implication - it's the reality.

Do you think that civil unions are the most effective way to promote equal rights to LGBT individuals?  Do you know anyone who has the opportunity to get a civil union but is holding out for marriage?  If you are straight, how would you feel if your were only afforded a civil union, not a full marriage?