Why should civil unions be restricted to only gay couples? The purpose of civil unions is to give gay couples legal recognition (i.e. hospital visitation privileges and insurance rights) based on their circumstances, not their sexual orientation. Since that is the case, than the same legal recognitions should be given to all relationships that are in the same circumstances, regardless of sexual relationship.

Robert P. George, professor of jurisprudence at Princeton University, writes:

In other words, domestic partnerships, if states elect to have them, should be nondiscriminatory and inclusive. They should be available to people based on needs, not on sex. The law certainly should not discriminate in favor of those unmarried people who are in sexual relationships over those with the same needs who, though committed to caring for each other, are not sexual partners. Widowed sisters living together and looking after each other, or an unmarried adult son taking care of his elderly father, may have the need for domestic partner benefits such as hospital visitation privileges and insurance rights.

A constitutionally sound domestic partnership law would not discriminate against such people by excluding them from eligibility simply because their relationships are not sexual–just as a nondiscriminatory and inclusive law would not undermine marriage by treating unmarried sexual partners as if they were married.

In other words, we should allow the same civil union to, for example, two (or more) friends, regardless of sexual intimacy and genders, who wanted to provide mutually for one another and who may also have the need for domestic partner benefits, such as hospital visitation privileges and insurance rights.