Connecticut Legislature Panel BACKS Gay Civil Unions

[SeanQuinn]

HARTFORD, Conn. - Connecticut's legislature moved closer to legalizing civil unions for same-sex couples, as a key panel approved a measure that could make it the first state in the country to recognize gay unions through legislative action rather than court order.

The legislature's Joint Judiciary Committee (news - web sites) voted 25-13 to pass a bill Wednesday that would give gay and lesbian couples the same state rights as married heterosexuals, except for the right to obtain a marriage license.

Proponents said Thursday the civil unions measure has bipartisan support among lawmakers and will likely pass the House and Senate by early June, when the session ends.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050225/ap_on_re_us/gay_marriage_connecticut

The kicker:

Gov. M. Jodi Rell, a Republican, has not said whether she would sign the bill, saying she would study the precise wording if it comes to her desk. Rell has said she is in favor of civil rights for same-sex couples but believes marriage is between a man and a woman.

[BOSSHOG]

1. I just don't understand this

Two people who love each can get married now. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say otherwise. Thats why the haters amongst us want to "amend" the constitution. To hell with civil unions. If two gay people want to get married, so be it. And it really matters not one dogfuck what a state governor thinks a marriage is. Would someone please tell me where in the Constitution it says Gay couples can not get married.

[davidinalameda]

2. still not marriage

even if this passes and is signed into law, those couples still don't get the over 1000 federal benefits that heterosexual married couples get

separate but not equal

[merwin]

4. baby steps. Change doesn't happen overnight.

[BOSSHOG]

5. I guess I'm just hardheaded

but what has to be changed? The Constitution does not prevent homosexuals from getting married. That's why conservatives want to "amend" it. A Church led by people who hate in the name of Jesus Christ does not have to marry homosexuals but the state has no choice, unless states take ACTION AGAINST A SEGMENT OF SOCIETY. Any change must be instituted by those who don't want homosexuals to have all the protections of the constitution. Am I wrong?

[sadiesworld]

3. Nice to see progress being made.

[Lexingtonian]

6. This'll be fun

This is going to be the big test for the "don't go for gay marriage, go for civil unions for now" theory.

[Maat]

7. As a law student, I do like to see domestic partnership laws ..

and civil union laws passed.

True, it is separate but unequal, and I support pro-same-sex marriage laws.

But, that having been said, when domestic partnership and civil unions pass, case law (court opinions, which are just as binding as statutory law) ensues that builds supporting structure for civil rights that will never go away. We start adjudicating, people start getting used to the idea of human rights, and I think things get better.

I believe that if these law passed in every state that it would only be a short time before federal benefits would come to fruition.

And these laws, and the ensuing case law, would buttress the equal protection arguments.

So, I believe that any progress we human rights advocates make is a good thing.