We need a new word.

The New Jersey Legislature is the latest governing body to approve civil unions between people of the same gender.

The couples will have the same rights and responsibilities of marriage, but without sharing the actual word – a key sticking point for both sides.

As a result, they won’t be “married.” They will be … what?

In Vermont, which passed civil unions six years ago, they call it being “C.U.’d” As in: “They got C.U.’d a few years ago.”

That doesn’t cut it for so momentous a change in one person’s relationship with another. It sounds too much like C.O. – certificate of occupancy – or CEO – chief executive officer.

Or P.U. – for, you know. Or P.O’d, for, again, you know.

Besides, we have enough alphabet labels in our lives. Picture someone saying, “After he graduated from MIT and was diagnosed with ADHD, he was arrested for DWI on his way to getting CU’d.”

In theory we could use the term “unionized,” but that conjures up images of throngs of teachers waving foam fingers at the Statehouse. When you hear about gay marriage, do you think longshoremen? Didn’t think so.

Perhaps the other word in the term could be forced into extra duty. “They got civilized a few years ago” has a nice, celebratory ring to it, but that word already has its own, perfectly fine, meaning.

The term “partner” has already become so widely used and accepted that the gay meaning now encroaches on the word’s original meaning.

Two architects who form a design firm now feel uncomfortable introducing each other as “my partner.” Ditto two lawyers. What used to be a straightforward descriptor of a business arrangement now comes with a lot of hemming and hawing and awkward jokes.

The civil-union bill’s Senate sponsor, Democrat Loretta Weinberg, said this month, “Once the rights are in place, we can work on the words.”

The most obvious word – marriage – has been placed out of bounds by political opponents. They want its meaning to remain unchanged. They can no more understand changing “marriage” to include a same-sex relationship than they could understand using the word “tree” to describe a flower, or “boat” to describe a car.

(Of course, words do change over time. “Planet” used to be applicable to Pluto, and “gay” used to mean happy.)

I suspect that even people who are fervently opposed to gay marriage will find themselves using “marriage” to describe two people in a civil union, if only because everyone understands what it means:

It means that if you gossip about one spouse, it’ll immediately get back to the other.

It means if you invite one spouse, you’d better invite the other.

It means hands off, they’re both taken.

It means if they’re invited to a birthday party or wedding, they’ll bring one gift.

It means when the check comes, one person will pay for both their meals.

It means they send out joint Christmas cards.

Law or no law, most people will call that “married.”

Kathleen O’Brien is a staff writer for The Star-Ledger of Newark, N.J.