LGBT Well, we lost a battle, but not the war...

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Sam Gamgee, Mar 30, 2004.

  1. Sam Gamgee

    Sam Gamgee Every tool is a weapon if you hold it right. OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Messages:
    78,919
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    Western MA
    Proposed marriage ban passes in Massachusetts

    The Massachusetts legislature gave final approval for this year to a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage but legalize civil unions, taking the first decisive step toward stripping same-sex couples of court-mandated marriage rights. Monday's 105-92 vote, which must be affirmed again during the next two-year session and by voters in the fall of 2006, completes the legislature's action on gay marriage for the year. Under a decision in November by the state's highest court, the nation's first gay marriages will take place in Massachusetts beginning May 17. The proposed amendment would have no effect on that deadline, but Gov. Mitt Romney has said he might seek a way to delay any marriages if a proposed constitutional amendment were adopted this year. The proposal specifies that civil unions would not grant federal benefits to gay couples. If the amendment is approved by voters, Massachusetts would join Vermont in offering same-sex couples the chance to join in civil unions.

    Gay rights advocates had urged lawmakers to let the court decision stand. "I believe many of them are going to feel very ashamed of what they've just done today," said Arline Isaacson, co-leader of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus. Many conservatives also opposed the solution, arguing that it requires citizens to vote on two very different questions--a gay marriage ban and legalization of civil unions--with one vote. "We are giving the people a false choice," said state representative Vinny deMacedo, a Republican. "We're saying, 'No problem, you can vote to define marriage as between a man and a woman, but the only way you can do it is if you create civil unions that are entirely the same as marriage.'"

    Supporters of the measure argued that it was the only way to get some type of constitutional ban on the ballot in November 2006. "The amendment stinks, but at least it gives people a chance to vote," said Democratic state representative James Fagan. All 200 seats of the legislature are up for election this fall, and lawmakers will have to defend their votes on the contentious social issue.
     
  2. CoCo

    CoCo ...is a Queer Don!! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    12,343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Maryland ; the land of Mary's...
    yea... I'm usually better at posting these things early, but I've not been as OT friendly (I was on Vacation), so I had to catch up on all of the threads I had missed ...hehe.

    Mass Lawmakers Ban Gay Marriage, Grant Civil Unions
    March 29, 2004 8:17 p.m. ET

    BOSTON (Reuters) - Massachusetts lawmakers on Monday ended seven weeks of emotionally charged debate by agreeing to ban -- for this year at least -- gay marriage while granting same-sex couples similar rights under civil unions.

    In a 105 to 92 vote, legislators ended a third marathon session of often tearful and impassioned debate to accept a compromise amendment, hammered out by senior Senate leaders, that may alter the nation's oldest constitution in 2006.

    Responding to last year's state court ruling that will allow same-sex couples to marry after May 17, lawmakers cleared a first hurdle but will have to vote on Monday's amendment again in 2005 and put it to a public vote in 2006 before it could become law.
    Minutes after the vote, Gov. Mitt Romney said he will ask the court to reverse itself and prevent town clerks from handing out marriage licenses to gays and lesbians.

    "I will seek to stay the court's decision until the constitutional amendment process has run its course," Romney said. Monday's vote has created a conflict between two branches of government, Romney said, adding "I believe the Supreme Judicial Court should delay imposition of its decision until the people have had a chance to be heard."

    The fight over gay marriage has become a national, election-year issue, with President Bush coming out in favor of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning same-sex marriage after several local officials, claiming ambiguity in the law, began marrying gay couples in California, Oregon and other states.

    Vermont is the only other state in the country to have civil unions for same-sex couples.

    While the vote disappointed both sides, it also appeared to offer them something they want.

    BOTH SIDES DISAPPOINTED

    "The best would have been to defeat the amendment but the second best outcome is this," said Sen. Stan Rosenberg. "The tide is moving in our direction," he added, noting several lawmakers switched sides amid furious maneuverings.

    With civil unions, same-sex couples will receive many rights that are currently denied to them in the state, but they will still not receive many federal benefits.

    In another marathon debate, many lawmakers said voters should not be asked to cast a ballot on this issue because they fear it could enshrine discrimination in the constitution.

    "Popular votes are no way to protect fundamental rights," said Sen. Cynthia Stone Creem as police cordoned off hundreds of supporters and opponents of gay marriage clogging the hallways of Boston's historic state house. Shouts of "Let the people marry" mixed with screams of "Let the people vote."

    "The religious right is trying to make this into a religious issue, but it is not. This is about civil rights," said the Rev. Tiffany Steinwert, a Unitarian minister.

    Nearby, Chaletta Huertas, wearing a bright orange scarf to signal what she calls "spiritual warfare," said "We know in our hearts that gay marriage is wrong. God has given us limits to whom we can marry, and I believe that gay marriage is wrong."

    Opponents of gay marriage also claimed victory.

    "We preserved the sentence that marriage is between one man and one woman," said Ron Crews, a spokesman for the Coalition for Marriage.

    To pass the time as the debates dragged on, some gay activists turned to happier events and swapped stories of the wedding ceremonies they plan to have this summer.

    "We are going to have a champagne and cake reception," said Bonnie Winokar about her planned July wedding to her partner of 17 years, Mary McCarthy.


    Source => http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=843057&tw=wn_wire_story
     
  3. NOVAJock

    NOVAJock Modded & Underrated

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2002
    Messages:
    15,260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Nowhere in particular
    Yeah I saw this on Yahoo last night. :(
     
  4. CoCo

    CoCo ...is a Queer Don!! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    12,343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Maryland ; the land of Mary's...
    other forms of civil disobediance...

    Minister files affidavit with county to document same-sex wedding

    The wedding of two lesbians in Kirkwood Saturday may be valid in the hearts and minds of the couple, but it has no standing in St. Louis County.

    The Rev. Daniel O'Connell, who performed the ceremony, filed an affidavit Monday, declaring that he has "solemnized" the wedding. The county accepted the papers and recorded them, but Janice Hammonds, the county recorder of deeds, said they mean nothing.

    "He's not filing it as a marriage license because he can't," Hammonds said. "We don't record legality. We accept it, but it doesn't make it legal."

    The recorder accepts documents that attempt to establish a fact, Hammonds said. As long as people pay the recording fee, the documents are generally accepted. In most cases, the papers filed at her office are about real estate transactions.

    Lesley Proud and Sally Nelson of Creve Coeur were united Saturday at O'Connell's church, Eliot Unitarian Chapel.

    O'Connell said he thought that recording the document was important for posterity. "When someone says, 50 years from now, what was the first gay union in Missouri, this will be on record."

    Hammonds said it was the first gay marriage ever recorded by her office.

    O'Connell said he hopes that other gay couples will have public wedding ceremonies to demonstrate support. In time, he believes the public will recognize that denying full marriage rights to gays and lesbians is wrong.

    "It was illegal for blacks to sit in certain parts of restaurants, too," O'Connell said. "It took a long time for people to wake up to the issue. We're not expecting miracles overnight."

    He paid a $30 recording fee and called the day a success. "For one thing, they were nice to me. I didn't get arrested."

    Same-sex marriage has been illegal in Missouri since 2001. The Legislature originally banned gay marriage in 1996, but the law was thrown out for technical reasons.

    Neither Proud nor Nelson returned a phone message left at their home Monday. O'Connell said he believes the couple will apply for a marriage license after their honeymoon.

    If that happens, the effort will be purely symbolic, Hammonds said.

    "They will be told we cannot accept their application, and we will show them a copy of the statute," she said.

    Jeff Wunrow, executive director of PROMO, a St. Louis-based gay rights group, said he "wouldn't be surprised" if more gay weddings are performed around Missouri, but his organization will not encourage them. The group is lobbying the Legislature, urging it not to put a measure on the ballot this fall that would amend the Missouri Constitution to ban gay marriage. The proposal has already passed the state Senate.

    Wunrow said his organization has "always been on the side of working within the system. Others are free to pursue their own strategies."

    Source => http://makeashorterlink.com/?A16F263E7
     
  5. CoCo

    CoCo ...is a Queer Don!! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    12,343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Maryland ; the land of Mary's...
    And in Iowa...

    Senate Narrowly Defeats Gay Marriage Ban
    [​IMG]
    Lawmakers Vote 25-24 To Defeat Same-Same Marriage Resolution


    DES MOINES, Iowa -- The Senate narrowly defeated a resolution Tuesday night that would have called for a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages.

    Lawmakers debated whether the resolution, which defines marriage as a union between only one man and one woman, was needed.

    Sen. Matt McCoy, a Des Moines Democrat, argued that there's already an Iowa law that recognizes only marriage between a man and a woman.


    "We're wasting our time on meaningless, hateful, mean-spirited, discriminatory legislation, and for that I'm truly sorry and ashamed to be part of this body tonight," McCoy said.

    He said a voter referendum on the amendment would have cost the state about $1.4 million "to outlaw something that's already illegal in Iowa."

    McCoy was among the Democratic lawmakers who opposed the resolution and clasped hands and patted each others' backs after it was defeated 24 in favor to 25 against.

    Sen. Ken Veenstra (pictured, above center), an Orange City Republican, sponsored the resolution.

    "I still have faith in Iowans, that they will stand up and be counted when it comes to defending traditional marriage," Veenstra said.

    He said lawmakers should bolster the state constitution, especially after recent court rulings around the nation that recognize same-sex unions.


    Source => http://www.newsnet5.com/news/2946680/detail.html
     
  6. CoCo

    CoCo ...is a Queer Don!! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    12,343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Maryland ; the land of Mary's...
    And in Kentucky and Minnesota...

    Ban On Same-Sex Marriage Defeated In Two States

    Tensions Flare In Kentucky, Minnesota



    FRANKFORT, Ky. -- Constitutional amendments that would ban same-sex marriage have been defeated in two states.

    In Kentucky, tensions flared in the House after Republicans staged a walkout hours into a contentious debate. In their absence, too few votes were available to pass the measure.

    Although the Republicans favored the ban, they were angry that Democrats wanted to fold the gay marriage issue into a single bill with another measure, and curtail debate without consideration of GOP amendments.

    Kentucky has had a law since 1996 prohibiting same-sex marriages, but supporters of the amendment say a state constitution ban is the only way to cement it.

    In Minnesota, a Senate panel has killed a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage. The legislation had passed earlier in the Republican-led House; its rejection had been expected in the Democrat-controlled Senate.

    Source => http://www.newsnet5.com/family/2954206/detail.html
     

Share This Page