Update: Oreo, Dog Thrown Off Building, Was Euthanized
People Wait For Tomorrow's UWS Apple Store Opening
Emily and Sarah Kunstler, Filmmakers
Cheap Chicken Wing Deal Ruined by Gunslinging Teens
FIT Students Busted For Drug Dealing Get Probation
Or at least Connecticut will recognize civil unions of gay couples. Connecticut Governor Jodi Rell signed the bill into law yesterday, without court pressure. Even though some lawmakers are upset that a bill approving gay marriage wasn't passed (which is what Massachusetts has), still many gay rights advocates are pleased with the bill. And of course there's opposition who is planning protests and vowing that lawmakers that voted for the bill will face challenges when they are up for reelection. Gothamist wonders if this will mean NYC's gay couples will move to Connecticut to take advantages of what this means (various tax and insurance benefits, family leave), especially since the city's gay marriage question is in legal limbo. Will gays have their main residence in Connecticut, but keep a pied a terre in the city?
The Hartford Courant on this milestone. And the Metro-North is the best way to get from here to Connecticut.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Civil unions are STILL discrimination against gays. It's the modern equivalent of "separate-but-equal". It is important to mention that the same bill that allowed civil unions in Connecticut also officially declared that legal marriage can only be between a man and a woman. It is offensive that people think the institution of marriage needs to be "protected" from gays.
Rio, thanks for the clarification. I think many people appreciate baby steps, even if it's not an ideal. What I think is interesting is that the states that seem stereotypically stodgy and Yankee are the ones that have made strides in recognizing gay unions and/or gay marriage.
"Will gays have their main residence in Connecticut, but keep a pied a terre in the city?"
Oh please. I WISH I could afford that.
Actually, Connecticut is pretty liberal. Maybe it seems "stodgy and Yankee" because you haven't done your homework. Watching The Ice Storm takes two hours; Googling election returns or Richard Blumenthal, two seconds.
Gays have NO RIGHT to be married. Marriage is a privilege and not a right. Obviously, most of the nation will ban gay marriage. It is already happening. Places in the Northeast and California will run the gamut from civil unions to marriage.
I am uncomfortable equating gay marriage with heterosexual marriage. It is too bizarre. However, I guess I could live with civil unions. Life is too short.
Soooo whats the difference between Marriage and Civil-Unions again? Does one have more rights over the other except from having a different name?
Ahh I can hear all those Holy Rollers now. "We must Protect the Sanctity of Marriage!" Maybe they should worry more about abusive marriages and the high as hell divorce rate before they go after gays.
"Does one have more rights over the other except from having a different name?"
mostly federal tax situations. on a state by state basis, it would vary.
This whole thing would be a moot issue if the (mostly) religious institution of marriage wasn't state sanctioned.
The ideal solution would be to call everything civil union, then couples can go to whatever church will marry them. Kill the two birds of Equality and separation of church/state with one stone. That's not going to happen though.
"marriage is a privelege and not a right?" oh, it's not even worth starting...
The government should get out of the marriage business entirely.