CT legislative committee votes for civil unions 25-13

[NewJeffCT]

i did a quick search and did not see this, which surprised me.

A key legislative committee made history Wednesday by endorsing a measure that would make Connecticut the second state in the nation to adopt civil unions for same-sex couples.

After a lively two-hour debate, the judiciary committee approved the civil unions bill by a 2-1 ratio in a largely bipartisan vote.

The proposal needs the approval of the full House and Senate and Gov. M. Jodi Rell to become law. But if that happens - and several lawmakers predicted it would - Connecticut would join Vermont as the only other state to extend nearly all of the rights and responsibilities of marriage to gay and lesbian couples.

"We have an opportunity to provide a huge step forward for equal rights," said state Sen. Andrew McDonald, a Democrat from Stamford and co-chairman of the committee. McDonald, one of several gay legislators in Connecticut, noted that unlike Vermont, Connecticut lawmakers are acting without a court order.

http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-gaywed0224.artfeb24,0,1291228.story?coll=hc-big-headlines-breaking

[NewJeffCT]

1. no responses on this?

Thought it would get at least a few... especially if a Republican governor ends up signing the bill.

[JerseygirlCT]

2. I think it's very interesting that the fight in CT

is between the gay rights folks who have decided to go for an all or nothing gamble for marriage, and the civil union folks, who don't feel ready to go there yet. All the coverage is about these two camps -- nothing about the third "ewww! no way" group at all. Which I take as a heartening sign.

The gay-rights coalition feels civil unions are not a stepping stone, but a dead-end. Most of the legislators feel it's a first step. I don't know who's right, although I do believe the only fair solution is marriage.

[NewJeffCT]

3. I agree that it should be marriage

However, I also know that there is no way the legislature would pass gay marriage this year and I doubt the governor would sign it, if it did. And, this is with a State Senate that has a veto-proof Democratic majority and a State House that has an almost veto-proof Dem majority.

One state senator - Mary Ann Handley of Manchester - did vote against the bill saying that marriage is the only fair choice. My question to her would be, if civil unions pass the senate by 1 less than a veto proof majority and Rell vetoes it, would she vote to override the veto?

[JerseygirlCT]

4. I know - I agree with you

it's a tough situation... I'm all for marriage, and I agree that CU is just a less-than-equal solution. But I do think that it's a stepping stone, and once people are sort of "ho, hum, civil unions" they'll be ready to say yes to marriage. However, I'm straight, and I'm perfectly open to the idea that I'm missing something more here, or misreading the situation...


I think Rell would sign a civil unions... just a gut feeling -- nothing to back it up, really.

Then she'll have the K of C contingent and their petitions to deal with, but most of the state supports CU. I don't think it's an especially difficult political position to take.

Guess we'll see.


edited because "known" isn't "know"...

[JerseygirlCT]

5. I stand corrected:

Guess Rell won't support... I think that's foolish of her. Sigh.