More and more people are becoming skeptical of the institution of marriage. The high divorce rates on the one hand, (55% in Sweden, 45% in the US, 38% in France), increasing numbers of single parenthood on the other (in 2007, in the US 40% of babies were born to single moms), financial stress that complicates the rearing of children, infidelity becoming more common (20% of men and 15% of women under 35 reported cheating), the no-fault divorce making the process easy and cheap, all have contributed to a fear of tying the knot, here, in the UK, and in Korea.
Well, is there an alternative besides cohabitation? The answer is coming from France in a package called PACKS (Pacte civil de solidarité). As you have probably guessed, it is a civil union. The law was enacted to allow gay couples have some of the benefits of a marriage but it soon attracted the heterosexual population as well. The contents of the legislation allow the two partners to become contractants and organize their common life. They do it by registering a common declaration to the court in which they state their address in France or abroad. The contractants agree to mutual help while they are jointly responsible for debts occurred because of household expenses. They are eligible for tax benefits after three years while the tenant’s lease may transfer to the other partner if one leaves or dies. Also health benefits are transferable to the partner.
How do you dissolve it? Simply by filing a common statement, or after a three month delay at the request of one partner. No lawyers involved, no legal fees, no lengthy processes.
How popular is it? The number has grown from 6,000 in 1999, to 140,000 in 2008. It is a half solution to marriage, it offers some of the benefits and removes the costs of a long term commitment.
Do you see it coming to the US?
Do you see it coming to the US?
84 comments:
Yes, I absolutely see this trend of a civil union coming to the United States. As a society, with the trends of modern technology, things have become fast and more accesible to us than ever. We have now come to expect things to be fast and easy and readily available. The civil union is ideal to this notion. However, those who believe in the sanctity of marriage, may be offended, because the amount of people who get married will diminish and "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" The civil union would allow for the perks and benefits of marriage minus the commitment and expense. This idea is great for "commitment-phobes", but not so much for those who want a committed, lifelong marriage. Regardless if it is a ggod idea or not, I bet it will come to the US and be popular among both homosexuals and heterosexuals in these changing times.
Yes, I do see civil unions coming to the US.
As the blog shows, divorce rates are absolutely incredible. I've often wondered why people go through the trouble of getting married when many couples enter the relationship doubting its long term potential in the first place. Obviously there are the "benefits of marriage", but it seems like those benefits would pale in comparison to the negative aspects of divorce that are experienced by nearly half of the couples that marry.
I think we've come to a point in our society where we're constantly looking for the easiest way out of everything, allowing our selfish ambitions to outweigh any other issues that arise. The civil union offers a couple the best of both worlds: not only will they receive the benefits of being married, but they will NOT have to go through the trouble of divorce if such an end should be met. This greatly aides the selfish desires that we-as a society (in my opinion)-have grown to not only love, but also to expect.
I do see civil unions coming to the United States. I believe civil unions will help both homosexuals and heterosexuals. For myself, a civil union would be the closest thing to "marriage" my partner any I will get to have. People hear civil unions and they automatically think "gays". Well, civil unions do not only pertain to homosexuals. Civil unions also pertain to heterosexuals. Society is not the same now as it was 50 years ago. As we can see in this blog, divorce rates or outrageous now compared to what they were 50 years ago. Times are changing and we need to keep up! Civil unions are popular. The statistics prove it. The number has grown from 6,000 in 1999 to 140,000 in 2008.
Come on civil unions!!!
Definitely, no doubt in my mind the civil union trend will soon be a normal part of our society. As for how soon until it is considered expected I wouldn't know. There is always a high demand for simplified ways to getting what we want. This civil union just seems like another stepping stone. Like every other issue we encounter there is always going to be controversy. It could be disputed in many ways why it is right or wrong but when it comes down to it, it depends on how high the demand is. Benefits might include fast efficient and easy but on the downside it might not do right by a lot of people morally. I think it comes down to the number of people for civil unions and the amount against it. The higher the demand the sooner the change.
The movement of the PACKS package (or civil union law)to the U.S. seems absolutely inevitable. It feels as if it will only be a matter of time before the idea of two partners becoming contractants at the aspects of organization, mutual help, tax benefits, and health benefits sans commitment will no longer bring about confusion or criticism.
Thus far, our class discussions have served as a tremendous support in blog claims, and I don't feel like it is coincidental. We recently talked about the positive and negative characteristics of the U.S., and it crossed my mind that a positive characteristic of the U.S. would be that we are often seen as a sort of salad bowl of different cultures. Within our country, we possess a blend of people that are of different beliefs, values, and needs, and time has brought an improved ability at accommodating more and more of the variations presented. When traditionally marriage may have been seen popularly as a long-term commitment, an act of love, or a demonstration of heartfelt vows, frankly, times are changing. Not only may there exist differing views of marriage ceremonies, customs, and entailments in our country, but "marriage" may serve a different purpose altogether for specific groups of people. Love and passion may not be in demand so much as the practicality of being part of a union that directly addresses joint responsibility for debts and transfer of health benefits. Marriage, or partnership, does not have the same meaning to all people, and the same desires do not come to mind first. The availability of the civil union choice would just seem to be a manifestation of the salad bowl the U.S. has become, and an accommodation to the varying needs of a new and different time period.
The U.S. does not only come across as a salad bowl, but also a country becoming largely interested in ease. There seems to be an ongoing pursuit for things that are as quick and simple as possible without negative consequences. The costs of a long-term commitment oppose this much more than the simplicity of dissolving a civil union. The priorities of this union drew the crowd it has already accumulated, and the quick, painless "insurance policy" involving no fees or lawyers keeps them there.
"PACS" is deffinintly going to come to the United States. I’ve been in a four year relationship and I already want to sign up just so I can save money. Whether Americans can recognize it or not we are in a depression the economy is struggling. Who has the money for the traditional big wedding? No one, unfortunately that is the truth people that want a big wedding better start saving up because if you don't you’re not getting that wedding. "PACS" provides an easy way around marriage with little penalties. For lower and middle class Americans this is the way out of courtroom for marriages and divorces.
Do I see that law coming to the United States? I don't know, it's hard to say. That solution seemed so involved, I don’t think Americans personalities would fit well with this plan. Usually when I think of divorce, I think separation, done, finish, you don’t have to see anymore of that person. But as far as something like that goes, I think Americans obviously have different mindsets as Europeans, Americans are becoming more and more independent, their need for individualism is definitely rising into account and to present something like that to most women coming from my frame of mind, I am not too sure it would be something I would agree upon and I am not even American but I’ve been here for 8 years and I am already hugely influenced by that state of mind. So maybe, a few years down the road something like that might happen but for no, no I don’t think it will.
-Manouchka Silgnena
M,W 4P-5:15P
I think that right now it's just a bit early to tell whether this trend will or will not hit the U.S. but at the rate that things are going right now here in the U.S. I believe it's a pretty big possibility. Marriage used to be sacred back in the days now it's
more of a joke then anything. You've got teenagers getting married right out of High School and a good percentage of them don't even last more then a couple
years. Not just that but some people date for a year or two and then decide that they want to spend the rest of their lives together. In my book, 1-2yrs of dating is NOT enough time to tell whether you want to be with some one for the rest of your life. Another reason why marriages don't last long these days are because of everything being advertised these days, today's music along with the way women dress and throw themselves at men not caring whether they are in either a committed relationship or not. The moral has hit the floor! The way I see it, Men these days speak to women anyway they want with such vulgarity but half of the time women accept it and let them but that's a whole other topic all together. Getting back to the subject I think this whole trend will definitely support that oh so famous statement "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free," again supporting the fact that morality has gone out the window.
The question isn't will this trend pick up increasingly in the US but why it HASN'T faster is what surprises me. I have read the comments from everyone and i must say that i agree with most opinions. Of course there are some people who may find the idea of civil unions as morally wrong, and defeating the sacred marriage values, but who says that just because two people decide to make a decision to cut the luxury of a "traditional wedding" and sign papers and call it a day, that doesn't mean that the values still aren't there. My mother was married for 30 years with my father and they followed their vows and loved each other till my father's last breath; even though it was a civil union. It's not always necessarily because it's easier, but like CLICKCLACK said we're in a depression. Now unless your well-off, or have saved up money ready for your "dream wedding" most middle to low class Americans won't have that luxury. So yes, I absolutely see this trend of civil union coming to the US.
Yes, if it is quick and easy, and you receive the benefits, without the long term commitment, Americans will accept it. Marriage is the backbone of society; however, people tend to give up to quickly these days. We tend to be selfish and only think of our individual needs instead of thinking of our partners. So the divorce rate keeps growing, and we make it easier to get divorced all the time. I believe this why we have more kids struggling in school and life. The civil union is a good temporary solution for Gay's and lesbians, until gay marriage is legalized, however,I find it will destroy society in the long run.
Yes, I think the civil union trend will be in the U.S very soon. I feel like a lot of people in this country look for the fastest and easiest way to do things. This is by far faster and easier than an actual marriage. This will be a way for people to commit without having to “tie the knot,” which a lot of people may be more comfortable with. When a couple goes through this they will have all the benefits of being married, but wont have to go through an actual divorce if they break up, and a lot of people would prefer that to an actual marriage.
It may attract some attention however I don't believe it would benefit anyone besides same sex couples in the US.There isnt any difference in PACT and marriage to me, besides the fact that no lawyers are involved to dissolve the relationship. It does have very useful benefits such as the healthcare issue. One reason people dont get married is because of the fear of commitment in which case this is basically the same thing.I seriously doubt legislature or any state governments to take this seriously,its just a way of saying this person is my girlfriend/boyfriend and putting it on paper which I think is a waste of time.Its not necessary.
I think that the PACKS would definitely catch on in the United States. I feel that as time has progressed, people all over, but especially in the United States have become more independent. Our society has become less group and family/friend oriented and more self oriented. In the near future, I wouldn’t be surprised PACKS caught on in the United States. Our gradual shift from other people could easily lead to the end of marriage as a whole. But for now, I would expect to see less people become married. Another reason people may choose PACKS over marriage, however is, as discussed, the high divorce rates. If we think that we will get married and soon after get divorced, there will be less people who get married to begin with. So it doesn’t seem crazy that if people want the benefits of marriage without really being married, they can just get PACKS.
I believe the PACKS system will not catch on in the United States. Marriage has been a long standing tradition in many cultures and religions. Many people would see the PACKS as a way to have the benefits of marriage without getting married. This might also enrage some people who believe that others should bind their love though marriage. Many Americans see being married as part of the American dream and as one of their goals in life. They might not want to give up this dream just to make a divorce easier. Countless United States citizens feel love, loyalty, and companionship are expressed by the act of marriage. Due to this, the PACKS system would not assimilate into American society.
I hope to see PACS or some civil union alternative in the United States. Unfortunately, I think we are slightly behind the curve when it comes to progressive ideas such as this. Like many here have indicated, you can’t hear civil unions without thinking “gay marriage” or some equivalent. The powers that be have long contended that marriage is a sacred union. To open the institution up to a legal commitment would have to allow for same-sex unions, because religion is the main platform on which they deny this right. While the US general population may be more tolerant of homosexual commitments, the political waters are not nearly as tolerant. Proposition 8 failed despite money and star power. There are only five US states that allow such unions and they are in almost constant battle to maintain the privilege. Further, in 1996, congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act, making civil-unions legally unrecognizable on a federal level. There would have to be a massive political tide change to allow for civil unions. A feat even Obama may not be able to orchestrate.
From what I read most of you are pretty sure it is indeed coming. I am not sure if the mitigating factor is the recession we are going through... however the reasons are open to discussion.
Absolutely at one point "PACS" will be in the US. Recently because of the economy divorce rates have increased tremendously. There are few people that get married in a traditional kind of way and people go into the marriage for not all of the right reasons. For instance, some people want to be financially taken care of, when things go the wrong path, its so easy to "get out" of a marriage with no strings attached because of a individuals own selfishness. These days, people do not want commitments, they want it to be easy, fast, and with the most benefits they can get.
Marriage is... a joke nowadays.
It doesn't matter, people will still get married, and will still take it as lightly and easily as the "PACS" will make it.
No one knows of love forevermore
We look, we lust
Therefore we think we love
But love will wear thin
As our mascara runs
At the end of the every night
Our eyes reflect in the mirror
A bitter sweet
Love for ourselves and our ideals in the end.
Just the existence of something that can make life easier will always attract the US. The PACS does exactly that, and makes life easier living with another person. Not only does it provide this, but also benefits with sharing a common life. But are those benefits only alleged for PACS members only? If that’s the case, then the civil union could cause others to think they are getting the short end of the stick. And what about those people who are already going through the cruel reality of divorce? The marriage rate would defiantly decrease if it was to come here, and moral strength in the relationship would seem to be nothing less than a simple goodbye with no headaches. I believe that there being an easier way to live with someone, also provides an easier way to leave someone (without good reason). I think that the way divorces are set up and are such a hassle is a way to get people to rethink why they are leaving that person. If the situation is dire and needs immediate attention, then you’ll go through the divorce with no complaints. Therefore, I find PACS almost a threat to the US, because it’s something we’ve all been waiting for, and easier way out. But there isn’t any doubt in my mind that it will make its way over here in the future.
Yes I do see this coming to the USA. It is just one more step to make things easier for people. They don’t want to take time to really get to know someone before they get married and then really commit to the marriage. I feel that we make it too easy to get out of a marriage. There are only a couple of reasons I think for terminating a marriage and the first is obvious to me and that is spousal abuse. The second is proven cheating. People in this country today do not want to work at their marriage like our Grandparents and most Parents did. My Grandparents when they died were still married and I believe they were in their 90’s. However my parents did get a divorce after about 25 years but at least all but one of their children were grown and out of the house. My husband and I have been together 30 years and trust me it has been rocky and times. Life isn’t easy by any means.
But I do see it coming to the USA maybe It will help people see if they want to marry this person and maybe people will stay married longer once they do get married and maybe the number of divorces will go down in time, or maybe people will just use it to replace marriage.
Yes,I do see civil unions coming to the United States,not now but in a couple of years or so.Some people don't take marriage as a serious issue.A friend of mine has been dating her boyfriend for two months now and she wants to marry him already.You need to know that person for a while.Marriage is a big thing, it's gets harder as the day progresses.
The civil union is a good key for the lesbians and gays.I think that it is going to have an affect in the future though.
Although it is a half-way solution, I must say it also serves as a "testing the waters" period. You try PACS for a couple of years and if it works you proceed with marriage. This is something that we have observed in France with many of the couples involved.
No, The house, the senate, and congress would not allow a Bill like this to pass. Just recently, last election, the gay comminity was stripped away from there benefits. Another reason are lawyers. Who would pay them? Divorce lawyers get a service fee. If this were to pass in the U.S. it would affect them big time. Bottom line, it is not a real commitment. There are too many religious beliefs out here. No preacher would allow it since it goes against every thing he/she believes in. "For richerand poorer, in sickness and in health, till death do you part". That is how it is suppose to be.
I idea of civil union coming to the US is probably a responsible solution to the fast steady divorce rate. People get divorced for an array of reasons. I wouldn't justify that this union is an easy way out, or morals are being violated in the grace of God. Every individual has their breaking point at different levels & depending on what the reasoning is for the divorce, its not fair for those to pass judgement based on their own morals, values, & beliefs. There will always be those outside influences(LIKE FAMILY) that try to manipulate, control, or push the marriage into a white picket fense with children, dogs, cats, frogs, chickens, etc... Sometimes people have priorities that others say are selfish but in respect to all comments, I am number 1 in my book! When people are driven for personal success, it is NOT selfish, it is your right! When the person you love is weak minded or insecure, it makes life that much harder when it comes to sacrifice for the greater cause of ones priorities and goals. What is this sacrifice, you might ask? The White Picket Fense!!!
I completely agree with (rrodriguez) "For richer and poorer, in sickness and in health, till death do you part." I may be a what everyone calls a hopeless romantic but it's what I believe. Things called Pacs might seem like an easy fix for the divorce rates but people aren't going to take relationship anymore serious with these. I just think that with it being more easier and cheaper couples are just going to abuse it more so in the end it's just going to more bad than good. Whether I agree with it or not "Pacs" are going to spread to the US one day but I don't think it's going to last very long.
Yes, I see this Pack coming to the United States. Although, I have strong believes about marrige. It is my thoughts that because, society has made it so easy, to get out of a marrige for any reason that people get married; if someone tells him or her that they look cute, or are good in bed.Marrige is suppose to be something special and not to be taking so lightly. The people of france did something that even though in the eyes of God is wrong it keeps people from breaking an even bigger promise to God. But, keep in mind hose who do take marrige how its meant to be taken will be against it as well as those who believe in God.Plus it keeps the courthouse free from being contained with the hundreds of people trying to seprate. If the Pack dose come to us here it would allow people to have the same benfits as a married couple. But, without all of the trouble and with out having to pay an arm and a leg to get away from the person you now can't stand. Although this pack sounds great but, it will in the end it will hurt more people in the end ; because people male or female will say or do anything to get what they want. For example,most guys will use it to get into a females pantsand then on the other hand some females would use this to her advange say if a guy has money all wants is rights to ohis money . Need I say more...
Yes, I believe this civil union will come to the United states, but probably some time in the near future. This seems like a great solutions because Americans and people in general like to take short cuts with few consequences and i am sure this will lessen the divorce rate greatly.
It’s hard to say if I believe PACS will come to the United States, I think if the U.S was actually going to do it they would have done it already. Since PACS is more of a “contract” than a marriage, I think people will take advantage of it just because they want the benefits. You always hear gay men and women say they want gay marriage rights, but I think that is gay men and women do this “contract”, they will be giving in and not fighting for what they really believe in. When odds are because of the divorce rate they will not be with their partner for that long anyways. I personally do not believe that PACS should come to the U.S.
i believe that civil unions will come to the united states. I believe that due to society divorce rates have soard and i believe civil unions will become very popular because then people dont really have to pay for there mistakes during the divorce. My beliefs on the civil union is that it should not happen. In the united states Civil unions were proposed for homosexuals. I feel strongly against this because the government is trying to make it seem like homosexuals just want the perks to marriage. when the truth is some homosexuals want to get married because there in love and they want the state to recognize that. at least that is how some of my friends who are homosexuals said they viwed it. though my beliefs are against civil unions i do unfortunatly see them becoming very popular in the united states.
I absolutely think it is possible for this trend in the Civil Union to come to America. Here in the United States, we are evolving into a coutry that makes everything easier. If this would make marriges and divorces more simple and take up less time and money then theres no reason the US would deny it becoming a part of our country. This may even be good for the US. Having the benifits of being married without all the scams people run on who gets what and how much money when the marrige never had a chance to begin with. Now days, getting married is more common and divorce rates are because of the jumping to comitment people have. If it is so easy to get married why should't it be just as easy to split up? Therefor, I am almost positive that this will eventually be practiced in the United States.
I can definitely see these type of civil unions merging into the U.S. There are so many people who are already choosing to live together but not marry that something along these lines would just accommodate their plans.I can see the pro's and con's of this entire affair. As previously mentioned by a different blogger, it does defy the sanctity of marriage which I personally honor. However, the reality is that we do live in America and marriage has basically gone down the crapper around here. I believe that some are entitled the rights of their beloved. I have a personal friend who was with a man for five years and they had a child together but could not marry due to legality issues and technicalities. He passed away in an accident and she was left with few benefits. To answer the original question, however, I do forsee these unions coming to the U.S.
An alternative cohabitation could be to abolish the NO Fault divorce law altogether. Changing the law and making it harder to get a divorce. This could be bad because of hatred toward either partner could lead to hostile incidents. Getting rid of the law could be a good thing by sending couples to counseling to help them work through mishaps. Another alternative is to get rid of marriage altogether. Implemented laws stating parents are equally responsible for any offspring.
A cut and dry, simple way to dissolve the Civil Union (PACKS) is to allow people to have relations with whomever what ever they want. A Civil Union can be made to support relationship between people and a tree, a sibling, a bum, a heterosexual, a wealthy person, a bisexual, or a horse. People seem to want things they don’t have from time to time along with lots of attention. Oh yeah and money comes along with publicity not to say that single parents get more help from the State then united with an unreasonable person. Popular or not give the people everything they want. The U.S.A. is a Democracy. The United State will keep changing over time.
I see this pact coming to the United States. Marriage is becoming to be considered a huge responsibility that most people can’t handle. With the rates of divorce going up, so is cohabitation. More people find that being in a committed relationship can be considered to be easier. Also at the same time I think that this could be a risky situation. Combining all legal responsibility has it ups and downs. The good part of it is that you can split all expenses, but what if your partner decides to leave? Will we be responsible for all of his/her debit? I personally, can not deal with someone else debit let alone mines.
I do see the civil union in the United States. It will be part of our society before we know it. We tend to like things the easy way, without compromise. One will get it because it will be cheaper and it doesn’t involve much commitment than getting a traditional weeding, also because one will have all the benefits (health insurance, taxes, etc). If it doesn’t work, you just fill out a common statement. Easier than that I don’t think it will get. The divorce numbers will drop because marriages will stop first, and I think is very sad, just because of the fact that it will not be healthy for the children involve in this civil union. What morals are we going to teach our kids? That’s it is ok for one to get together on a civil union. If it works, it works if not, bye, bye. What happen with love? When you promise that you going to be together until death tear us apart…..
It's quick, it lacks any real commitment, there is virtually no moral contemplation, and it's easily broken. I think the chances are extremely good for it making its way here to the US, especially with growing tolerance of homosexual couples. Divorce rates have climbed over the last decade because people don’t think things through before getting married and with civil union now those people won’t have to. It’s all the perks of being married without any of the inconvenience. People here, and apparently in Europe have a conspicuous lack of moral center and are finding new ways to make that more acceptable every day. Civil unions are convenient and that alone would probably sell most Americans on it. But it is my strong opinion that things like this will only hurt us in the end.
I feel that the younger generations see marriage as a happy celebration. They are excited and lured by the passion behind the engagement and the dream of a spectacular ceremony. The Honeymoon is next and who wouldn’t want to spend a week away from everyday life. But then reality sets in after all of the commotion has died down that they are stuck with this person for the rest of their lives. They spend so much time rushing into marriage that they forget to really think if they would be happy with this person or not. So they cheat and the divorce rate rises. A marriage is only as successful as the amount of work you put into it. With that being said I think that any couple, heterosexual or bisexual, should be able to share the benefits that a married couple share without all of the expenses attached with marriage and divorce. I believe the U.S. have not adopted this law because the majority of the citizens believe marriage should be between a man and a woman.
I can visualize a union similar to PACKS in France opening up to America, for both homosexuals and heterosexuals. In today's world, people want convenience. This seems like a very convenient way of life. There is very little cost involved, there are benefits with taxes and health costs, and if the couple decides to move on, then there aren't any legal fees and it seems very simple to part ways.
However, I believe that many Americans would have an issue with this. Most Americans are religious and believe in the sanctity of marriage. They believe that when you get married, you are putting the union of a man and a woman in the hands of God.
This PACKS availability would not be doing that, therefore, really, what would be the difference between that union and basic cohabitation? The difference is really very minimal.
Strong opinions and some funny alternatives... :))
Many have substantiated their argument by emphasizing a common American value, that of "convenience." Another interesting point by those who strongly support the sanctity of marriage was the cost/benefit analysis they developped (what is more harmful in the end of the day?)
Which brings us to another American value, that of pragmatism.
This a new generation indeed.
Do your parents know? :)))
Great posts!
With divorce rates being so high in America I believe this civil union will make it to the United States and become very popular. I think a lot of people who are more old fashioned and believe in the sanctity of marriage will have a harder time accepting this new trend. I think it will make things easier for heterosexuals and homosexuals as well. With all the controversy about homosexuals getting married and having the same rights as a couple, I believe this civil union will make things fair for everybody. Every couple can have some rights that a married couple has without actually being married, I think its an excellent idea. I think a lot of people now a days don't get married because of love they get married for financial reasons. Our generation has a completely different outlook on marriage then people did 30 years ago..
With divorce rates being so high in America I believe this civil union will make it to the United States and become very popular. I think a lot of people who are more old fashioned and believe in the sanctity of marriage will have a harder time accepting this new trend. I think it will make things easier for heterosexuals and homosexuals as well. With all the controversy about homosexuals getting married and having the same rights as a couple, I believe this civil union will make things fair for everybody. Every couple can have some rights that a married couple has without actually being married, I think its an excellent idea. I think a lot of people now a days don't get married because of love they get married for financial reasons. Our generation has a completely different outlook on marriage then people did 30 years ago..
(oops I messed up the first time and cant delete my first comment that says anonymous sorry)
I believe that PACS will come to the US. If for no other reason than to give the homosexuals a voice. The government wont let them marry so how do they stop them from signing a contract that allows them to be together as if they are married this will become very popular. The heterosexuals will use it as a safe guard for there relationships for those that really want to be married but are afraid because of the divorce rate. With the new X generation things have excelled so that society is just looking for new ways and reasons to change. Hopefully this will cut down on some of the marriages that probable never should have been. This contract is like the calm before the storm which leads to divorce.
I feel that it should come to the United States. I cannot see the politicians allowing this to be passed. One of the many issues that are talked about during elections is family values. There would be a lot of opposition for this because of allowance if cohabitation without the sanctity of marriage.
The United States has too many religious institutions in this country that would oppose this from ever happening. Civil unions would be looked down upon for the main reason that same sex couples or a man and a woman could live together and have a legal commitment without being married. The nation cannot even agree about common law marriages. Some states have common law, that if a couple lives together for a certain length of time in the eyes of the state they are married, not all states agree. If the nation cannot agree about that or same sex marriage then how is the country going to agree about civil unions?
There are too many outside influences that can interfere with the decision making of politicians. It is a shame because this would be a good solution for lowering the divorce rate.
I wish I could say that I saw the trend of civil unions coming to the United States, but sadly I do not think that this will ever happen. The government has so much pressure upon it by the religious right, that civil unions will never be accepted here. At this time, 11 states allow common law marriage and 5 permit them under certain circumstances. Michigan has even eliminated common law marriages. With this groundwork already laid out in this country, I do not see any way in the foreseeable future that we will institute a law for civil unions across the board. I can see some states possibly allowing all types of couples to enjoy them, but those will most likely be the same states that allow same sex marriages now. In many ways, we are very closed minded about any relationships that differ from the “norm”, when compared to other countries.
Some arguments are being made about the influnece of religious groups who may force state governments to reject it.
That is a very legitimate argument.
Now think about this.
Could PACS lower to some extent the poverty levels we observe after a divorce? (Yes, divorce and single parenthood remain strong predictors of poverty). Part of the poverty comes from the expense associated with divorce proceedings.Could PACS with its limited committment encourage couples to postpone parenthood?
If PACS contributes (indirectly) to a lesser degree of poverty, do you think that local governments are likely to listen to the religious groups?
Food for thought or far fetched scenarios?
Yes, I do see this civil union coming to the US. Having a 45% divorce rate is quite high and is more than likely growing higher by the day. Americans seem to be getting married for the purposes of having a child or because of society’s actions seen by celebrities (i.e. Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie). People in the US seek for money and success; therefore I believe that the civil union would attract Americans since there are many benefits to it. This could prolong a marriage and divorce rates could decrease. The civil union could make partners more understanding of the others and accommodate to their needs in a marriage. I believe many people could benefit from this and it will come to the US within a matter of time.
Yes, I believe the civil union will become as commonplace in the American society as much as divorce. Because many people today have “commitment phobias” the PACS would be the easy way instead of the strains and tribulations associated with marriage. The PACS agreement is somewhat mocking the sacredness and purpose of marriage and shows how today's society has less of an attention span and patience when it comes to our partners. The PACS program seems like something people have been doing all along except without a contract which is just living together and when you get fed up or break up with your partner you leave.
I definitely see civil unions being more popular in the future, and widespread in the USA. Marriage however offers mores benefits and protections. I think many heterosexuals will still choose a traditional marriage over a civil union despite divorce rates being high. I would assume most people marry with the intention of being with that person their entire lives, so I believe some won't find civil unions useful.
This opportunity for homosexuals is good, however. Civil unions are only available in a few areas in the US and can been viewed by some as a "better-than-nothing" alternative to marriage.
Yes, I could see this civil union coming to the United States. many people these days don’t believe in getting married they feel like marriage puts to much pressure on the relationship and may even ruin there relationship. In most cases couples love the idea of living together and getting some of the same benefits a married couple may have like reducing there finances; but if they were able to get packs also it would be even better for them. I believe there would also be a down fall to this civil union coming to the United Sates because it wouldn’t cause people to second guess but triple guess marriage with divorce rates complimenting it.
This idea of commitment without marriage is something that I see coming to the United States because most Americans are afraid to commit to one person and there for would jump at the chance to have no strings attached to them. I also see this idea coming to the United States because it is a cheap way for people to right stuff off on their taxes so they can get more money back or owe less. My last reason why I think that this idea of fake commitment will come to the states is that the younger generation will take to it because they see all the trouble that their parents went through with divorce and they will not want that to happen to them. These are my reasons why I can see this idea coming to the states soon
The constitution of marriage will always have believers and non believers, and that is why PACKS will make it's way to the U.S. The numbers or statistics will influence many Americans though most will think its convienent and quick. Society is becoming more and more accepting of new ideas rather than traditions. The commitment of marriage keeps getting further away from our us. Its gone from never getting divorce to now, half. Civil unions are not far from the U.S. Unfortunately, there is no way to turn it around!
With its popularity jumping from 6,000 in 1999, to 140,000 in 2008, I strongly believe that the United States will eventually develop a law inspired by the PACKS or (Pacte civil de solidarité). The idea of it is inevitable to today's society as the divorce rates continue to increase in the country. The civil union is definitely a trend the United States will catch on sooner or later because in today's world, people have grown to be more self-oriented and think for themselves as individuals rather than to be part of a bigger community. The modern world does not necessarily have the same moral judgment as we did in the past, there will be homosexual relationships amongst one another and why not allow that to be legalized when those couples are less likely to be divorced compared to the "normal" man and woman relationship?
Yes I definately see this coming to the united states. So many people are getting divorced as you can see from the blog. Marriage is almost becoming somthing you do for sometime and when something bad happens or you just get bored you quit and move on with your life. This would make everything so much better so that you would not have to get married. If you are not sure that you want to be with that person for the rest of you life you just get a civil union. Then down the line if you feel that you do want to be with that person for the rest of your life then you can get married. It will take away the people that are getting married just so that they can get all of the tax breaks and the health benefits.
Yes , I do believe that it will soon be an option to some in the United States. To some people , it might not make such an impact because they believe in the lifelong marriage . The divorce rates are off the charts , as seen that almost 50% of married couples then divorce after awhile. Also, many couples are afraid of "marriage" so they don't marry. This could make all the difference in their love lifes . I think it will prevent less divorces and also mothers becoming a single parent. Like every trend that comes around , it will have its public that will be for it or against it. So ill be waiting to witness the change that I know for sure it will make.
I am surprised that this 'Pacte civil de solidarité' is not already here in America. This is my first time hearing of it. I expect to see it take off as soon as the US population realizes there is such a provision. I personally hope that it does. The more individualized our society becomes the more a civil union of this sort is going to be needed. I hope with a movement like the Pacte civil de solidarité there will be less constraints and obsession on gay marriage. I hope civil unions become the new marriage. I am not gay but growing up in the dancer community I have attained many wonderful homosexual friends. It is very hard to see two individuals who love each other not be able to take the next step and be married just because the dictionary states it's between a man and a woman. It's sad to think that homosexuals aren't allowed to marry but heterosexuals are allowed to partake in civil unions. I hope civil unions such as Pacte civil de solidarité becomes more wide spread. Everyone should have the ability to take their love for someone else to the next step (marriage), or half of a step (civil union).
I most definitley see this coming upon the society in the United States. We as a whole dont have the same values as we had decades ago. Everything has become easily accessable over the past decade or so making anything possible to find a loop hole to get through. I believe highly in the constitution of marraige. It has become more natural to get married and become divorced within the close of the year. With the new law it will make things easier for people to be less commited to one another. This does take the morals out of becoming a union of one but i believe that it will spread like wildfire and become something that is very popular and add something to the U.S. to make us even more lazier than before.
Let me first start off by saying I didn’t know that 45% which is almost half of the U.S is going through a divorce. Also on the other hand 40% of babies born to a just a single parent which is a mother. We wonder why our society is the way it is just look at the statistics.
I had never heard of this package PACKS before until now. I do see PACKS coming to the U.S. maybe not soon but eventually with the society being the way it is. When the package finally do come I feel some of these statistics will go down and more people will enjoy being married.
A good thing that I do like about PACKS is no lawyers are involved. Also the partners are jointly responsible for debts due to household expenses. Overall my view of the PACKS package is life changing for couples and children, hopefully one day U.S will adopt this package.
Although I believe that PACS is a great idea and would be very beneficial to many in the US, I do not believe it will be allowed in the foreseeable future. The main obstacle of civil union would be the general population’s religious beliefs. Some would have issues with allowing gay and lesbian couples to have any type of union and others would see it as a way to avoid marriage altogether. The idea that it may slow down marriage or allow an alternative would lead to most churches denouncing the idea. If it slows down marriages, then who will replace donations to the church for use of facilities for weddings? Law makers in Washington are too worried about the possibility of re-election to attempt to pass something that some consider controversial, but would resolve a very big issue for a growing number of Americans.
“First Marriage Dissolution, Divorce, and Remarriage: United States” a report from the CDC states that one in five marriages ends within the first five years. Maybe we can implement civil unions to be the first step to getting married. Possibly having a couple enter into a civil union for a pre-determined period of time before being allowed to wed could then slow divorce rates. By doing this some may come to realize that they were together for the wrong reasons. It would at least make marriage something that you would have to earn the right to do, not something you can just do on a whim.
Personally, I do not think that Civil Union will become popular in the United States. Although I think that gays and lesbians should have the same benefits as those who are not, I don’t think that Civil Union will get pass any time soon. The idea may be nice for some people who want its benefits without marriage but I don’t think we can count on it happening. Also, I know that some gays belief that Civil Union is not enough for them and they want the right to marriage. Given our cultures and history, and also Christianity being our main religion in the United States, I doubt that something like this will become popular in our country. It maybe a nice idea but I do not believe that it will be widely accepted.
I am having a hard time coming to a single decision on this topic.
Part of me says no, I don't see it happening here. Mostly because we have so many people who believe marriage is marriage is marriage. And it belongs to one man and one woman. Who are in love and have not engaged in sexual intercourse before the marriage. They can't open their eyes to other types of "marriages" or with other couples.
However, I do say yes. Because in the last 10 (or so) years, people have become so diverse. And even if something is "looked down upon", you aren't afraid to say that you agree with it, because of the large amount of diversity here.
With that said, I'm stuck!
I definitely see PACKS coming to the United States very soon. Just recently my boyfriend and I were talking about how you shouldn't need a license to show a basic human emotion... love! If two people live together and they're content then that's good enough for me. Actually when I talk to most married couples they say that everything changes afterwards. It's kind of like the other person feels like you belong to them and all of the charisma and chivalry you saw before and fell in love with all goes away. Even the majority of newlyweds who've lived with each other prior to getting married say the same. Personally I don't want to change my last name and go through unnecessary procedures to change my name and verify that it's me if my maiden name ever comes up. Signing for a marriage license is not going to change how I feel about my partner or make them less susceptible to cheat. It's only going to give the government more power and money especially if we did decide to get divorced. Nowadays divorces cost more than marriages with all the legal fees they love to throw at you. I would love to have a wedding ceremony, but skip the license signing. We'll live happily ever after either way and if we don't then leaving each other will not be more of a pain than it already is!
Yes, without a doubt. I believe a civil union will be prosperous in the US like a wildfire. With the mentality of "each man for himself," the concept of togetherness does not mean anything in our society. The civil union provides the room some people seek to be “free”. They can reason that they did not go in front of God and take any vows, and don’t have to go through the humiliation of getting divorced. Also, some might find the civil union more cost effective. The cost of a wedding can be very expensive, leaving you in debt for the rest of your life.
Civil unions are already allowed in many states here, but they are exclusively for gay couples. I suppose it is only a mater of time before two heterosexuals file a suit for discrimination, demand that the right be extended to the heterosexual community and voila!
Yes, I do think PACS will come to the United States simply because it is an easy alternative to a long serious union. Many people tend to look for an easy way out of relationships that they have “committed” to and PACS allows for it. Marriage is very costly and most people spend tons of money trying to have a "dream" wedding. Later they find out (1 or 2 years later) that they want a divorce, which also costs money. PACS gives people the benefit of sharing financial obligations without all the formality of marriage. This will be sure to attract many people but not all, because a lot of people still believe in the sacred union of marriage. I’m sure it will disappear just like many new ideas that have come to the United States.
It's very possible for it to be coming to the United States, but i think it's stupid. It seems like an easy way out of marrying someone who you supposedly "love". If you want to marry someone then you should. You shouldn't have to "test" it, you either do or don't. It's like a cop out, You marry someone because you WANT to be with them as long as you live, "till death do us part". It shouldn't be said if its not meant. "PACS" to me seems like a uncertain way of finding out whether or not you can live or be with someone, but isn't that the point of dating a person? getting to know them, learning to love them. I understand that things happen like cheating and abuse, but people who get divorced because they "fall" out of love or just for some reason seems like a personal problem to me. So i do see this PACS possibly coming but it seems like a wasted effort and just Another excuse for Americans to loose more traditions.
I definitely see PACS package or civil union law coming to the United States. It would be great for couples that probably can’t afford marriage, but would like to have the benefits of a married couple for both homosexual and heterosexual relationships. As the popularity grows among many countries and some states, the U.S. government will recognize civil unions. As civil unions are generally directed towards homosexual couples in the United States, it may take longer until we see a declaration like this. France has had a major head start with civil unions starting in 1999, allowing them time to adopt and evolve to their current PACS system.
No, I don't see it coming to the United States. Because most people these days don't get married. And if they are married and have problems most of them don't go to the process of divorce because they don't wanna go through all the paper work. So they rather just stay with each other even though they know that it's not working out and both of them are having an affair.
From my point of view I just think they should stick to their vows and everything they promised to each other in the alter in front of the Lord Savior Jesus Christ.
YES! Without a doubt I believe Civil Union will find its way into the U.S. It may not be an easy process because of the counter-attacks on the issue of homosexuality. However, America is a democracy, the people vote. From time after time homosexuals have been picketing the White House for their “liberty and justice for all,” a young man in Arizona has refused to stand and say the pledge because he feels that the homosexual community has been deprived of their right to marry. If this view is seeping into the next generation and the generations are the people, the people will make a way and take advantage of this seemingly open door.
i absolutely see the civil unions coming to the united states.
if you think about it, what is the ratio of people that live together as partners now, to the people that are actually married? The numbers for both the homosexual community and heterosexual community are growing daily.
Since the idea has been put in to play by another country, it is only a matter of time until the United States begins to participate as well.
PARK will only encourage the cohabitation trend to continue to become popular. I mean, who wouldn't want to live with somebody, and get their benefits without having to be "married" They will look at this as "helping" the divorce rate.
Most people will not even think about the debt factor. Many friends, partners, or lovers that live together now have both singed the lease on the housing development they are in, thus meaning that they are already adapting to the responsibility of shared bills.
As mentioned before, I believe that the civil union will most definitely be coming to the united states sooner than we think.
As a homosexual, I do not see Civil Unions coming to the US anytime soon. If they did, it would be only for heterosexuals to have and to destroy like they have done traditional marriage. Religious people would argue that Civil Unions will destroy the sanctity of traditional marriage, but I feel traditional marriage is already destroyed by the high divorce rate in this country. A lot of homosexuals feel that Civil Unions are a copout. If the people of the US make the decision to make Civil Unions legal and if they are supposed to be the same as a marriage, then why don't they just call it a marriage?
In my eyes, yes I do believe that it is heading towards the US in the near future. I mean it will take full effect in our near future, but as for now divorce rates, single parents, and financial stress are definitely reaching its nearly high potential. Already, in America people are getting divorce so much these days because of numerous reasons and thus ending up diving their children up or just one parent having to raise the children. Then comes the full effect of single parenthood, many teenagers and young adults are turning up pregnant and having babies when they aren't ready. This is leading them to financial stress because most of these single parents do not have the luck of their own parents approval and support for the situation. In many situations, young girls and boy think that sex isn't such a big deal until the girls end up pregnant and the boy has to face the reality of getting the girl pregnant. The boys usually can't handle that kind of truth, so they turn around and run as far away as possible where as the girl is left standing there having to get ready to give birth to baby without a father figure around. In the US, these situations are already increasing so sooner or later this will end up reaching it highest point.
I can see this coming to the United States. I think today more and more people are rushing into marriage and marrying for finical benefit rather then love. I kinda see this as a trail run before marriage. Couples still get finical benefits and if you want to move on the next step after a couple years of the civil union you can. This is less permanent and less of a head ache if the relationship doesn't work out.
Yes, I do believe that it could very well become a trend here in the united states. Simply because the figures show the number of divorce rates dropping possibly due to the economy and family economic hardship. This then leaving a couple with no option of a divorce because, they do not have the financial means to file. This civil union would then give a couple in this situation the option of leaving free and clear, without any headache of dealing with the finances. There is no way to know if this is a good idea or a bad one. Just the facts alone of the failing marriage rates and, the state the economy would make this a more appealing way to co-habitat to most Americans in the united states.
Yes, I see civil union coming to the United States. However, I feel it is both beneficial and offending. The civil union is beneficial because it allows those afraid of marriage to have a feel for what it is like. Therefore, maybe they will want to get married because they see its not as bad as they thought. I feel as if it would offend those who are married because it would not benefit them. It may also stirrup some religious organizations who believe in the sanctity of marriage. Nonetheless, civil unions will eventually come to the Untied States, aiding both homosexuals and heterosexuals.
People rush into marriages sometimes, because the spur of the monent."PACS" will be great for that situation, because it will be the step before marriage that will solidify the commitment. I feel that "PACS" will be a big impact in the United States, but it seems like a law that will be hard to pass, because of some people that are strongly religious minded. I think it might make its way to the Untied States, but not anytime soon.
Yes, I can see civil union coming to the US. It has the benefits of a marriage without the responsibility. There would be no need for commitment. A person could do whatever they want without the need to worry for someone else because of they don’t feel the same about them anymore. The government also supports this type of system in the US. For example, if you have a person who lives with you and is not married to you, both of you can get your own separate checks for social security while a married couple would only get one check. In an insurance company, if you are married, that can increase how much you pay for your insurance. One would think that society would want to keep family as a priority, but it seems that society is straying more and more from family values.
I believe that the PACKS will come to the United States and try to pass the bill. But, I strongly believe the bill will not the approved into a law. The bill must go through the house, senate, congress, and the president. I believe the republicans are going to disapprove the bill which will be an endless debate. Also, in my opinion, it’s not worth giving those benefits because it makes married people give up more easily of the marriage. In addition, if you can get into a commitment, such as marriage, any vows shouldn’t be broken.
Many people are looking for a different solution to marriage and this could be an easier way. I could definitely see this becoming a trend in the United States. With the divorce rate going up and the number of individuals not remaining faithful to their spouses. This could eventually wipe away our traditional thoughts on marriage. There would be a lot less commitment and make it much easier to just pack up and leave. Which is why I believe it wouldn't work. People would be leaving each other twice as much as they do now because there would be no long term commitment. They would be gone at the first sign of something that wasn't right, leaving more single parents. Also we would have to allow same sex marriages since it is a similar pact.
Yes, I believe this trend will be coming in the US. The divorce rates have become so high where marriage has become a scary thing to commit to. Since it is a easier and faster process society will be more willing to commit to PACS rather then marriage. I disagree and believe we should stick to the true meaning of marriage. Starting such a program would really destroy others that are already married.
I believe that the civil union will be in the United States sooner than most people think. The divorce rates are sky rocketing each year. The civil union will cut down on the rates because it will be a better way for couples to be close to being married without actually “tying the knot.” It will also help, because it will be a cheaper way to have a divorce. Even though this will eventually make its way over to the US, I do not believe in it. I have always believed in the sacred marriage values, therefore, this new way defeats that purpose.
I am surprised we have not seen a U.S. form of "PACS" already. With divorce rates being so high, this civil union seems like an ideal compromise, But I don't think it should have all the bells and whistles that you would get with marriage, sorta like a you get what you pay for kind of thing. Unfortunately, if this was the case it wouldn't be a good solution for the rights of homosexuals who want all the rights a man and a woman have. What surprises me most though, is that France has had this civil union option for ten years and seen much success with it and yet it has not found its way to America. I do believe its migration here is inevitable.
Yes i see it coming to the united states, but more importantly, this country needs it. The divorce rate is high in this country. A lot of money is also spent during a divorce. For example, court fees, alimonies, etc. The PACKS will save us money. As Mrs. Smith said, this can be used as a testing the waters for couples. Some couples get married, but then figure out they made the wrong choice. Also, having a traditional marriage costs money. Like in the T.V. show "Platinum Weddings", couples spend a ridiculous amount of money on wedding, like a dress that costs $250,000. But, some couples wont take it seriously and forget the values of marriage. It will feel just like they are dating and can break up or a single fight and go separate ways. PACKS is more like a double-edged sword.
I think if civil unions were to be offered here in the United States they would be very popular by both Heterosexuals and Homosexuals alike. There would be a lot of people who would prefer it to the traditional marriage. Apart from being quite expensive, these days marriage does not seem to mean what it used to. The words that you recite do not have the same meaning they once had. “For better and for worse, for richer and for poor, in sickness and in health until death do us part and hereto I pledge you my faithfulness.” At the first sign of trouble we are already running for the hills. We live in world where many things are so disposable, including marriage.
I would like to start off by saying that it has long been my belief that governmental agencies should have absolutely nothing to do with marriages. In my opinion, marriage is a religious institution. Marriages and divorces (or separations) should be solely managed by the religious leaders (church, temple…) of the couple involved.
The government should therefore only be concerned with civil unions: between two women, two men, and even between a man and a woman. I don’t, however, believe that the United States will be seeing an equivalent to PACS anytime soon. Even though our pilgrim forefathers came here seeking religious freedom, too many U.S. citizens wish to impose their religious beliefs through the use of legislation that affects other citizens, that don’t necessarily have the same religious beliefs.
Individuals that believe that a civil union jeopardizes the sanctity of marriage should immediately stop reading this blog, write to their state representatives, and request that divorce be made illegal. For those individuals who wrote about marriages being about love and emotion, I’d like to point out that, until recently in human history, marriage was more or less a business agreement between two families who arranged the marriages of their children, usually for either financial or political reasons. Romantic love and even simple affection were not considered essential.
Post a Comment