link

Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire signed into law Saturday legislation to give gay and lesbian couples some of the rights that come with marriage.

The domestic partnership bill will create a domestic partnership registry with the state, and provide enhanced rights for same-sex couples, including hospital visitation rights, the ability to authorize autopsies and organ donations and inheritance rights when there is no will.

I've long argued that domestic partnerships benefit many more people than gay couples. And here in this article, it talks about another situation where domestic partnerships can help elderly people.

Do "they" think that gay people do not get married? If "they" think that marrraige is a religious right, do "they" think that gay people do not attend church, partake in the sacraments, and "get married" in their churches?

I'm all for getting the government out of the marriage business.

This is a step in the right direction.  It is still not "equal" rights.  I suppose, it needs to be done in baby steps.

Cindi

Yeah, there's some nice laws going into effect lately here in the northwest.  Look out for some new ones in Oregon.

Cool yay for WA.
Rashelle

Quote from: Cindi Jones on April 23, 2007, 12:46:55 PM
I've long argued that domestic partnerships benefit many more people than gay couples. And here in this article, it talks about another situation where domestic partnerships can help elderly people.

Do "they" think that gay people do not get married? If "they" think that marrraige is a religious right, do "they" think that gay people do not attend church, partake in the sacraments, and "get married" in their churches?

I'm all for getting the government out of the marriage business.

This is a step in the right direction.  It is still not "equal" rights.  I suppose, it needs to be done in baby steps.

Cindi

You're right. The sad reality is that this only applies when you live in Washington. Move and all is lost or you have to find a state that also recognizes the legal partnership. And yes, it also applies to couples over 62 to preserve social security and other incomes for individuals, lost if the they marry.

And you're also right, it's about equal rights. And if people would understand marriage is about legal status, religious status being separate and not necessary, then we could have a productive discussion about it and pass an equal right marriage laws. That's always been my first point in the discussion, move religion off the table and focus on the legal status.

While I agree baby steps are good, and in this case it is, overall though, it should be a federal law defining equal rights to marriage and force the states to accept it or lose something. If the feds can do this with education funds, equal rights for groups of people, environmental laws, why not marriage. While it's a State's right, the feds can undo the DOMA law for an Equal Rights to Marriage (ERM?) law.

And this is always my argument to fight those that argue it's a slippery slope. It's not because all other things will not change. It's that simple.

--Susan--

I understand what you're saying Susan and they tried that before, but it got shot down.  This is a new approach they are doing with baby steps and there seems to be a degree of success in this approach.  So, while an all out approach would instantly give us equal rights, religious people see it as us forcing them to agree to something that their bible tells them is wrong.  Also, it's just too tough to get many people to change their position on the issue.  It's just something that has to be done in time and as younger generations replace older ones, things WILL change.