Writer: "What’s new here, however, is his endorsement of civil unions for same-sex couples."
I am no fan of this Anti-Pope, but the writer of this article is not fair. The Pope is not endorsing civil unions. He is endorsing the use of a term to distinguish these fictional marriages from real marriages.
"Civil union" is the best term for this since it captures the idea, it is already widely used, and it does not try to twist the meaning of an existing term.
There were reports that Francis did support civil unions in Argentina prior to his election.
It is legalized sodomy, one of the sins that cries to Heaven for vengeance, and Bergoglio recognizes said sodomy as a civil right.
The civil union idea was around for a long time. But the original “civil union” proposal was meant to get a household of two people (including those such as an adult child living with and caring for an elderly parent, siblings living together, or just two people - who may or may not have been homosexuals or could have been a heterosexual couple in a “common law marriage” or even long-term roommates. This would have given them tax breaks and other perks, but was not the same as marriage and did not require a sexual relationship. I think it would have been fine, and I think the “civil union” concept should revert to this one and not be sexually based.