« 'Day of Silence' update | Main | Back from a break ... »

April 14, 2005

Connecticut gets it right

As many students yesterday spent the day in silence as a demonstration that hateful behavior directed towards gays AS gays is unacceptable, the legislature of Connecticut passed reasonable legislation on gay civil unions

HARTFORD, Conn., April 13 -- Connecticut's House of Representatives passed legislation Wednesday that would make the state the second to establish civil unions for same-sex couples, and the first to do so without being directed by a court.

The state Senate overwhelmingly approved a civil-unions bill last week, and lawmakers said they expect to endorse the House version as early as next week. Gov. M. Jodi Rell (R) said Wednesday that she will sign it. ...

It would provide same-sex couples who form civil unions with state and municipal tax benefits now granted only to married couples, as well as hospital visitation rights and a host of other benefits, including family-leave privileges.

And in a sure sign that this is just the right legislation at just the right time:
In the end, the most ardent advocates on both sides of the issue said they were disappointed.
Let me make MY position clear. I support, and believe, that sometime in the future same-sex couples will be included in marriage statutes. But I will never ever support such a move that originates in the judiciary because the public institution of marriage (as opposed to private relationships) is the singular province of The People. The People, through its representatives, have the right and power to define public institutions.

You'd think that the decades long intercine cultural warfare on abortion via the travesty of Roe v Wade would have taught the "marriage is a right" advocates the folly of trying to legislate through the judiciary.

Posted by Darleen at April 14, 2005 12:54 PM

Comments

- Oregon got it even righter with the striking down of county government same sex marraiges. Not because they are enherently wrong, but because the county has no implied rights of civil union determinations. I agree with you Darleen that this should be decided in the forum of public acceptance by the people and not the courts or non-sovoreign local constablishments that merely exist for the conveinience of the constituency. Everytime a faux government body tries to overstep its bounds it should be slapped down hard to discoursge this decidedly unconstitutional behavior. In this case I refer to state constitutions which are the final arbitor, even by writ of the federation constitution of the Union. The liberals would love to ignore our laws and use the biased courts to do their bidding. But thanks to modern high speed communications, the advent of the blogmecca, and the tendency for the body MSM to engage in tabloid journalism in order to try to stem flagging circulation, this sort of skulldugery gets swift and unmerciful "outing". There are viable and acceptable areas where discrimination is not only warrented, it is the moral imperative. People who cluck and say that fears of unintended consequences are over-reach and scare tactics are not thinking this thing through in their head long rush to right a wrong that has been too long practiced and accepted in society. Civil unions should be supported and legitimized. Not adjudicated by writ.

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at April 15, 2005 08:32 AM

Does a Civil Union between two lesbians mean that one of the partners, who is not a citizen of this country, would have, in essence, the equivalent of a marriage green card?? Enabling her to reside in this country?
If so, would we both be required to live in Conn. or Mass.
Thanks, Judy

Posted by: Judy Winsett at April 21, 2005 02:22 PM