Marriage Equality and Civil Unions
First, the facts
- Massachusetts and Connecticut license same-sex marriages. California did until prop. 8 narrowly passed.
- New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Vermont license Civil Unions.
- Maine, DC, Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, Maryland, and California offer gay couples “some” legal protections via Domestic Partnership.
- New York recognizes same-sex marriages performed legally in other states.’
- New York and Rhode Island are currently debating same-sex marriage legislation. Illinois is considering Civil Union legislation, while New Mexico is debating Domestic Partnership legislation.
- Same-Sex marriage is offered in the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, and Norway. Based on a recent court ruling, Nepal soon will as well.
- Civil Unions/Registered Partnerships are offered in Denmark, New Zealand, Uruguay, the United Kingdom, Andorra, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Luxembourg, Slovenia, Sweden, and Switzerland.
- Some form of legal recognition is provided to same-sex couples in parts of Argentina, Mexico, Austrailia, and Brazil.
- The protection of Unregistered Cohabitation (ie Common-Law Marriage) is extended to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples in Australia, Israel, Colombia, Portugal, Argentina, Brazil, Croatia, Ecuador, and Austria.
- Foreign gay marriages are recognized in Israel and France.
- Civil Union legislation is currently being debated in Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ireland, and Liechtenstein. Domestic Partnership legislation is being debated in Estonia and Unregistered Cohabitation for same-sex couples is being debated in Italy.
- A majority of Americans support either Same-Sex Marriage or Civil Unions: Quinnipiac 7/8-7/13: 65%; Newsweek 6/18-6/19: 57%; CBS 5/30-6/3: 58%
- Democrats now control the Delaware State House of Representatives, which has previously passed HB99 to establish Civil Unions (which was terminally stalled in the Senate). Republican William Oberle has long been a supporter of equal rights for gays.
- Democrats now have a 16-5 majority on the Senate. John Still and Charlie Copeland were replaced by Democrats.
- Jack Markell and Matt Denn support Civil Unions.
- Establishing Civil Unions or Gay Marriages in Delaware could bring in out-of-state revenue from Pennsylvania and Maryland.
- Domestic Partnership benefits are offered by several of Delaware’s largest employers, including DuPont, AstraZeneca, Happy Harry’s, and all the big banks.
With these facts in mind, I propose that we make 2009 the year that Delaware recognizes the rights of same-sex couples. I support Same-Sex Marriage, but I don’t think we have enough votes for that yet. Civil Unions, however, are widely popular, and I think we have enough support to make such unions legally equal to marriage. We need to turn our legislative victories into progressive action. We can’t allow the likes of Thurman Adams and the conservative members of both parties to stand in the way of civil rights.
So who’s with me? This is an issue supported by many Delawarean bloggers; not only liberals, but also Greens, Libertarians, and many Independents and Republicans. Watch this space for more on this issue as it develops.
I think Delaware is more progressive than Nepal.
BTW – Establishing Civil Unions does not require any church to perform one. Those that currently do perform same-sex marriage should be legally recognized under the first amendment.
I’m with you!
Count me in! How do we get started?
Consider my Delaware Talk Radio show a platform for this. We should do this up big time next year. I am on board!
Sounds like a swell idea.
Count me in
http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2008/11/zstryker-hits-nail-on-head-this-should.html
We can get started by coming up with a list of likely supporters. Sen. Sokola (D) and Rep. Oberle (R) would be at the top of the list.
Leave me out
“I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage. ”
Sen. Barack Obama
(CBS) Most Americans continue to think there should be some legal recognition of gay and lesbian couples, and 30 percent say same-sex couples should be allowed to marry – the highest number since CBS News began asking this question in 2004.
Twenty-eight percent think same-sex couples should be permitted to form civil unions, but more than a third – 36 percent – say there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship.
Last month, the California Supreme Court struck down that state’s ban on same-sex marriage, paving the way for gay and lesbian couples to marry there.
Americans’ views on this issue have changed since 2004, although opinion has not changed substantially in the last two years. In November of 2004 (soon after the presidential election) just 21 percent of Americans supported the idea of same-sex couples being allowed to marry.
Majorities of both men and women support some form of legal recognition for gay and lesbian couples, but more women (36 percent) than men (24 percent) back the idea of same-sex marriage.
More than six in 10 Democrats think same-sex couples should be allowed to either marry or form civil unions. Fifty percent of Republicans are against either of these options.
There are regional differences, too. Four in 10 of those living in the western portion of the U.S. favor same-sex marriage – the highest of any other region. Americans living in the south are least likely to support it.
Groups most likely to support same-sex marriage include those under age 30, liberals, Americans living in the west, and those who never go to church.
Republicans, conservatives, white evangelicals and weekly church attendees are groups that are least likely to support the idea.
CBS News Poll
In a time of budget shortfalls, underperforming schools and recession I hope this becomes the issue of the year.
Count me in! Prop 8 would have failed in California if it wasn’t for outside interference from the Mormon church.
Establishing Civil Unions or Gay Marriages in Delaware could bring in out-of-state revenue from Pennsylvania and Maryland.
That would make an interesting paper for some economics grad student.
Mike Protack,
Barack Obama is in favor of civil unions. Read on:
Although Barack Obama has said that he supports civil unions, he is against gay marriage. In an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, Obama said, “I’m a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman.”
Barack Obama did vote against a Federal Marriage Amendment and opposed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996.
He said he would support civil unions between gay and lesbian couples, as well as letting individual states determine if marriage between gay and lesbian couples should be legalized.
“Giving them a set of basic rights would allow them to experience their relationship and live their lives in a way that doesn’t cause discrimination,” Obama said. “I think it is the right balance to strike in this society.”
Sources: Chicago Daily Tribune, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
You know I’m in on this!!! Just to clarify, HB 99 had nothing to do with civil unions. It was a non-discrimination bill on housing, public accommodations, and employment.
Hmm, where are the Social Bigots on this one? Are they gong to pitch in? Delaware Politics, where for art thou?
I’ll contact my Senator (DeLuca) and Rep (Oberle) to see where they stand on this issue.
I am in.
It is about time something gets to happen on this.
I want to see George Parish (anti-gay marriage Sussex Clerk of the Peace) squirm.
Can I get a civil union with 2 dudes?
I highly doubt you’d be able to find one dude interested. Set your sights a little lower cowboy.
‘It was a non-discrimination bill on housing, public accommodations, and employment.’
There is no demonstrated need for this bill and in the end it will go nowhere. The problem is the minute anyone disagrees with anyone on HB 32/HB 99 you get the bigot label.
It is amazing that people who want everyone to practice acceptance and tolerance towards them never embrace those actions towards others who disagree with them.
Case in point, protests after Prop 8 in California which set back that cause for years.
Isn’t it amazing that some folks still want to carve out a group of people to deny some basic civil rights to? Only now, they try to co-opt the language of Political Correctness by claiming some victimization. I wish I understood how people even have the energy for this kind of demonization.
In any event, count me in, xstryker. Civil rights are civil rights and pissing off the bigoted is always amusing.
In terms of next steps — it seems that some outreach to local GLBT organizations is in order, and figuring out who else might be allies, which we’ll need. We also will need to come up with some model legislation we would like to see passed. The good news is that there are real models to choose from now. The legislative session starts shortly — we ought to get moving soon.
Mike Protack how do you know there is no discrimination in housing, public accomadations and employment. You’re not gay! I’ll never forget the day when I was standing in Starbucks on Marsh Rd. with my partner and a real estate woman walked in with her clinets before they moved on to the next property, the real estate women looked my partner up and down and commented to her clients. “It’s okay people like them don’t live around here”. Needless to say she was hissed and dissed by half of Starbucks and promptly led her clients out the door. Do you think this women or the real estate office she represented would have sold a property in North Wilmington to a Gay or Lesbian. You don’t know what you are talking about Mike Protack.
Unsatble Isotope – you can try this website for LGBT groups to contact.
http://www.towardequality.org
Rod what the hell! What a bad real estate woman. There are too many of you around here. 😉 She doesn’t know her business to well.
I’m gay, and I see that the problem with said nondiscrimination laws is that said nasty RE agent would be forced to sell me a house… I doubt that she’d be looking out for my best interest.
I’d rather do business (and work for) people who WANT to do business with (or employ) me, rather than people who HAVE to under penalty of law.
The status quo is wonderful in that regard — if a person is stupid enough to express homophobia, I move on to someone who will do a better job. And eventually, said homophobic moron gets crowded out of business.
That said, I am a huge supporter of marriage equality!
If the shoe fits, Pornstache, then wear it. You claim to be a libertarian, yet you won’t support equal rights legislation for the gay and lesbian community. You are a bigot. I’ll have some fun tonight throwing darts at your campaign sign.
In any event, count me in, xstryker. Civil rights are civil rights and pissing off the bigoted is always amusing.
I concur on all counts. There is never a limit to how far we should go to ensure equality before law.
All of the above, I say, and park your damn religion and/or religious dogma outside the doors of Leg Hall.
Personally I think the whole thing should never have entered civil law or policy, beyond the legal enforcement of privately-executed contracts.
But since it has, the gender of two adults wishing to civilly bond their lives, whether you want to call it marriage or civil union, is not a rational nor defensible basis for discrimination much less the denial of equal protection of the laws.
If we made statutory marriage as expensive as divorce, by charging the petitioners ALL the public (court) expense now incurred by taxpayers in divorce proceedings, forcing the public to pay for people to sort out their personal relationship wreckage, marriage would perhaps be taken more seriously.
Ooh, my first post! (Hi X!)
“It is amazing that people who want everyone to practice acceptance and tolerance towards them never embrace those actions towards others who disagree with them.”
What is it exactly you want us to accept and tolerate? That’s what I want to know. No one’s deleted your post, or told you you couldn’t post on here. You can still marry whomever you want to marry, live wherever you want to live, work wherever you want to work, worship however you want to worship (or not, if that’s how it goes for you). As far as I can see your rights are 100% in tact. So what else do you need accepted and tolerated?
Welcome, Mrs. XStryker!
Of course “their” rights are 100% in tact. Just more faux outrage and a new bogeyman. The silver lining is that most people who have a problem with gay marriage are a dying breed – literally, most are old.
The times, they are a changin’.
Worry no more. Jesus has returned.
I just saw this video at another site. I hope it goes viral. There are enough people who do get it. And for the others – well – it’s a waste of time trying.
There was a post here a month or so ago that included a few verses from Ecclesiastes and mentioned (correctly) that the theme of the book is that there is no heavan or hell so you should just live life the best you can and have fun. (“Vanity, vanity, it is all just vanity.”)
Of the few comments, one guy said something to the effect: “Nice post, but where did you get that in the bible.” Well, it’s there. All the terrible, murderous commands, contradictions, obsolete fiats ignored, etc. but no one cares because to guys want to get married and it’s a “sin”.
There was a post here a month or so ago that included a few verses from Ecclesiastes and mentioned (correctly) that the theme of the book is that there is no heavan or hell so you should just live life the best you can and have fun. (”Vanity, vanity, it is all just vanity.”)
Yup, it’s in there. There is also context. Keeping it simple, because this stretches my memory back to when I was a kid (yesterday???), that was basically the “before” part of an individuals before-and-after account of being “saved.” That commenter took serious liberty, but was technically correct by pointing out it was in there.
Oh, to be certain it’s understood, lest someone get the wrong idea about my reply, I am fully supportive of civil unions. A same-sex life-partner absolutely should have the same rights of survivorship/guardianship as my wife and I have with each other.
Hey Smitty and FSP, is Delaware Politics going to pitch in to get gay marriage passed?
So the homosexual abomination thing – is that before or after individual salvation?
I have done a bit a study on this and I can tell you that the bible is sort of like football statistics. There’s enough shit in there for someone to make anything one thing look good or bad. Whatever suits your fancy.
So the homosexual abomination thing – is that before or after individual salvation?
That is where a lot of the hypocracy comes into play (not from you, btw). Yes, they are educated to “hate the ‘sin’,” but love the ‘sinner’. Somewhere along the way, the loud-vocal contingent morphed into hate-the-‘sin’, crush-the-‘sinner’. There are what I think a surprising number who, while cringing at the ‘sin,’ are quite passive or complacent with the thought of civil unions. Problem is, they are scared or too nervous to speak up. Unfortunately, it makes their thought somewhat impotent.
There’s enough shit in there for someone to make anything one thing look good or bad. Whatever suits your fancy.
You got that right, although no one seems to understand the point about tithing is about giving to me. I try, but it doesn’t fly.
A contractual relationship between a same sex couple would confer certain rights that should not be denied. These could include critical decisions when one party is hospitalized. Such an arrangement does not require redefinition of a word with a traditional meaning.