Gay thread: a bit of unexpected news

[aidanjm]

The Connecticut legislature looks set to approve civil unions for same-sex couples. This is interesting because it is happening without any Supreme Court order forcing the politicians' hands (which was the case in Massachucetts, Vermonet, Hawaii, etc.) Polls are showing a slight majority of people in this state do support civil unions for same-sex couples. Recent polls also show a slight majority of people in New York and Massachucetts support same-sex marriage. Now that there are a number of states where a majority of the citizens appear to support the legalization of either same-sex civil unions or same-sex marriages, where does that leave the proposed federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, I wonder?



Conn. House Expected To Follow Senate In Passing Gay Unions Bill

by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff

April 7, 2005

(Hartford, Connecticut) Legislation granting same-sex couples civil unions is expected to encounter little difficulty in the House following yesterday's wide win in the Senate.

As 365Gay.com reported Wednesday, the Connecticut Senate voted 27 - 9 to pass the bill (story).

Today, House chairman of the legislature?s Judiciary Committee, state Rep. Michael P. Lawlor (D-East Haven) predicted that the civil-union bill is likely to pass the 151-member House with about 90 votes in support

But, Gov. M. Jodi Rell wants changes in the legislation before she is willing to sign it.

A spokesperson for the governor said Thursday that although Rell continues to support "the concept of civil unions," she wants to see a definition of marriage as an institution involving one man and one woman included in the bill.

A proposal to include the definition was rejected by the Senate on a 23-13 vote. Without the definition, the governor's office said, Rell may veto it.

As the civil unions bill makes its way to a House Vote, a new poll suggests that it has the support of a majority of people in Connecticut.

A Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday shows that 56 percent of registered voters support civil unions. However, when it comes to actual marriage, 53 percent of those polled oppose allowing same-sex couples to marry.

The survey, also shows that Democrats are more accepting of both same-sex marriage and civil unions than Republicans. The poll, taken before the Senate vote, shows that Democrats back both civil unions and gay marriage, 66 percent and 53 percent respectively. Republicans are narrowly divided on civil unions, 45 percent in favor and 48 percent opposed, but 70 percent oppose gay marriage.

The telephone poll of 1,541 Connecticut registered voters from March 28 to April 4 and has a sampling error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

©365Gay.com 2005

 

[Kibbo]

Good on 'em.

 

[aidanjm]

These figures are quite startling. 51% of citizens in New York State support same-sex marriage. >70% of people in New York State support making the basic legal protections associated with marriage available to same-sex couples. Such a stark difference between this state, and the 18 states which have rushed amended their constitution to ban same-sex civil unions/ marriages. This is the red/ blue divide, I guess.




Majority In NYS Support Gay Marriage

by Beth Shapiro 365Gay.com New York Bureau
April 6, 2005

(New York City) Support in the state of New York for marriage for same-sex couples increased over the past year according to a new poll.

The Global Strategy Group survey found that 51% of New Yorkers support marriage for same-sex couples while 42% do not. A similar Global Strategy Group poll conducted for the Pride Agenda last year in March 2004 found 47% in support of marriage and 46% opposed. Both surveys were taken by Global for Empire State Pride Agenda, the state?s LGBT civil rights organization.

The new poll also showed that New Yorkers overwhelmingly believe that same-sex couples should have the same rights and protections government currently grants opposite-sex couples through marriage.

Favorable response rates on questions about specific rights ranged from 72% in support of providing child custody rights to 83% in favor of providing legal authority to make decisions about a deceased partner?s burial. Seventy-two percent (72%) of New Yorkers also favored civil unions and domestic partner arrangements as avenues to provide legal rights to same-sex couples.

?These findings confirm that New Yorkers are fair people who understand that equality applies to everyone. This is good news for same-sex couples and their families,? said Empire State Pride Agenda Executive Director Alan Van Capelle.

?The other good news in this year?s poll numbers is that the national attack campaign being conducted against our families by the conservative and religious right does not appear to be fooling anyone here in New York. Despite a year of persistent nation-wide attack, New Yorkers are not retreating from their support for our families."

Van Capelle attributed much of the growing to support to a growing visibility of same-sex couples. New Yorkers have traveled to Massachusetts to marry and hundreds more to Canada.

"New Yorkers are seeing firsthand that life does not change when same-sex couples are allowed to marry," Van Capelle said.

"The only lives that are changed are those of same-sex couples who got married and now have more of the rights and protections they need to take care of their families. The doomsday scenarios about same-sex marriage being spun by the conservative and religious right are simply not true and New Yorkers are not falling for them.?

On poll questions about various rights and protections that government gives to those who marry and whether same-sex couples should have access to them, Van Capelle said, ?The poll clearly shows there is overwhelming support for our families having access to these rights and protections. When 72% to 83% of New Yorkers give a resounding ?Yes? to our families having child custody rights, medical decision-making authority, burial authority, health, pension and inheritance rights, there is no longer anything left to debate in New York. Family equality is a non-partisan issue and it is time for elected officials in Albany to hear what their constituents are saying and take action so that our families can have the same rights and protections others have.?

On the overarching question of marriage for same-sex couples, Van Capelle said, ?New York continues to move in the right direction on marriage. The increase in support this year over last year for the right of same-sex couples to marry tells us that New Yorkers are listening and thinking about this issue and are recognizing more and more that access to marriage is about equality and protections for real families.?

©365Gay.com 2005

 

[dmcowen674]

Good ol North Vs the South again. :thumbsup:

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Good ol North Vs the South again. :thumbsup:

Federalism at work?

 

[Darkhawk28]

And Connecticut's divorce rate is one of the lowest in the country, so they understand the "sanctity of marriage" much more than some of the Bible belt states. Maybe some states will take heed. :thumbsup:

Edit: Actually, Connecticut has the second lowest divorce rate in the country, next to Massachusetts.

 

[piasabird]

I think some politicians just figure that if they allow civil unions or gay marriage that there will not be anything left to argue about. This is just what we need to clog up the court system with Gay Divorce Attorneys. Cant wait for a high profile law suit for support after a gay divorce. Then you can file jointly for taxes and enjoy the marriage tax penalty.

I say let the gays have what they want. Who cares anyway.

Besides if all the gays get married the government can keep track of them. Plus we can get more revenue from all the gay marriages. Think of the income for the apperal industry. I want to see a formal wedding with a bunch of male brides maids. Then there is the catering and the restraunt industry that will gain rewards for the wedding receptions, and maybe even hotels for the guests to stay in.

Good, Bad, who cares.

 

[slurmsmackenzie]

then we'll be able to track gay divorce rates!

YAY! another thing to argue on P&N!!!!!!1111!!!!one

 

[Kibbo]

Originally posted by: slurmsmackenzie
then we'll be able to track gay divorce rates!

YAY! another thing to argue on P&N!!!!!!1111!!!!one

The voice of a true e-warrior. I salute you sir!

 

[conjur]

Things not to do if you're a bigoted, right-wing MN Senator

April 08, 2005
EXCLUSIVE Bachmann Footage at Rally
Today Minnesota Senator Michele Bachmann thought it would be fun to circumvent the Senate Committee process and force a floor vote of the amendment to end domestic partnerships, and ban civil unions and same-sex marriage while we were outside rallying for our rights. Even Senate Republicans thought it was in poor taste to try to go around Senate rules on the same day GLBT citizens were making their voice heard. Her move was overwhelmingly defeated:

"The state Senate on Thursday rejected an effort to force a floor vote on a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage as thousands of ban opponents rallied outside the Capitol. Sen. Michele Bachmann, the Stillwater Republican who's led the push for the ban, said Senate Democrats have denied her repeated efforts to get the bill heard. Senate leaders countered that Bachmann, a candidate for the U.S. House, is flouting Senate rules to advance her own political career. At the same time, about 2,500 gays, lesbians and their supporters attended a rally on the Capitol grounds just a few hundred yards away, organized by OutFront Minnesota." [Star Tribune]

After the move didn't pan out, Michele took to hiding in the bushes to watch the queers rally. A reader tip:

"I know you're no fan of Michele. And therefore, you might be
interested in a few pics I took at the JustFair rally on Thursday of
her hiding behind the bushes watching us from afar before I scared her away with the camera."

Here's one shot. (click images for full size)

 

[Zysoclaplem]

Good for them. Personally I would never get married/a civil union. Why you ask?
Because it would be like a list of registered homosexuals. And I don't want my name on that list.