March 22nd, 2010
 

365 Gay: News

Connecticut Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage


(Hartford, Connecticut) Connecticut’s Supreme Court ruled Friday that gay couples have the right to marry, making the state the third behind Massachusetts and California to legalize such unions through the courts. The ruling comes just weeks before Californians go to the polls on a historic gay-marriage ballot question, the first time the issue will be put before voters in a state where same-sex couples are legally wed.

The 4-3 ruling is the first time that a state that had willingly offered an alternative to marriage was told by a court that civil unions aren’t enough to protect the rights of gay couples. Connecticut was the first state to voluntarily pass laws to affirm civil unions.

"I can’t believe it. We’re thrilled, we’re absolutely overjoyed. We’re finally going to be able, after 33 years, to get married," said Janet Peck of Colchester, who was a plaintiff with her partner, Carole Conklin.

"I’m just ecstatic. It’s such a relief, the joy of it," said another plaintiff, Jody Mock of West Hartford, who sued with partner Elizabeth Kerrigan.

In the majority opinion, Justice Richard N. Palmer wrote that denying marriage to same-sex couples would create separate standards.

"Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay persons are entitled to marry the otherwise qualified same sex partner of their choice," Palmer wrote.

The Family Institute of Connecticut, a political action group that opposes gay marriage, called the ruling outrageous.

"Even the legislature, as liberal as ours, decided that marriage is between a man and a woman," said executive director Peter Wolfgang. "This is about our right to govern ourselves. It is bigger than gay marriage."

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said the ruling goes into effect Oct. 28 when it is implemented by action of the of the Superior Court. There will be no appeal, he said.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell said she disagreed with the ruling.

"The Supreme Court has spoken," she said. "I do not believe their voice reflects the majority of the people of Connecticut. However, I am also firmly convinced that attempts to reverse this decision – either legislatively or by amending the state Constitution – will not meet with success."

State Sen. Michael Lawlor, chairman of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, said he expects the General Assembly will pass a gay marriage law next year codifying the Supreme Court ruling.

"It’s important that both the legislature and the court weigh in," he said. "The court is saying that it’s a constitutional requirement that marriage should be equally available to gays and straights and the legislature should weigh in saying whether or not it’s constitutionally required, it’s the right thing to do."

The court was sharply divided in the decision, with three justices issuing separate dissenting opinions.

Justice Peter T. Zarella wrote that he believes there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage, and the court’s majority failed to discuss the purpose of marriage laws, which he said is to "privilege and regulate procreative conduct."

Zarella added, "The ancient definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman has its basis in biology, not bigotry. If the state no longer has an interest in the regulation of procreation, then that is a decision for the legislature or the people of the state and not this court."

The lawsuit was brought in 2004 after eight same-sex couples were denied marriage licenses and sued, saying their constitutional rights to equal protection and due process were violated.

They said the state’s marriage law, if applied only to heterosexual couples, denied them of the financial, social and emotional benefits of marriage.

Supreme courts in Massachusetts and California also have ruled in favor of gay and lesbian couples, concluding the domestic partnerships were unequal to the rights given in heterosexual marriage.

Civil unions and a similar arrangement, known as domestic partnerships, are offered to same-sex couples in Vermont, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Oregon, Hawaii, Maine, Washington and the District of Columbia.

Peck said that as soon as the decision was announced, the couple started crying and hugging while juggling excited phone calls from her brother and other friends and family.

"We’ve always dreamed of being married," she said. "Even though we were lesbians and didn’t know if that would ever come true, we always dreamed of it."


Login or Register to comment.

or Login with Facebook:

  • Roger RamJet Said: October 10th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
    • Friends, this should HELP our fight in California and Florida, even though there will be the obligatory attacks by the right-wung nuts for the next few days. Those on the right, who have called for this to be a ‘States Rights’ issue, will now jump back on the ‘we need a Federal Constitutional amendment to stop activist judges’ argument.

      Congrats to the fine LGBT’s in Conneticutt. Today you are winners in the battle for equal right!

  • Ginelle Said: October 10th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
    • What can be said but a thunderous and joyous YAHOO! The Gay Community of the Great State of Connecticut must be, and rightfully so, just so overwhelmed with happiness and success in the fight to gain marriage equality. How wonderful that can be. Congratulations!

  • Shawn Said: October 10th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
    • 3 down 47 to go

  • jibii Said: October 10th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
    • That is WONDERFUL news!

  • sooner Said: October 10th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
    • I am concerned about how close Proposition 8 is polling in CA. Wouldn’t it help if Obama gave a 20 minute speech in CA explaining why it’s important to defeat the measure? Obama is a great speaker with huge support in CA, and if he just rallied the troops in CA on the issue we could defeat Proposition 8. The gay marriage ruling in CA was a great moment for us, and now we are in danger of losing it. Since we are supporting Obama in massive measure shouldn’t we expect him to help us in CA on a measure that is so important to us and on which we have worked for so long?

  • Rachel Said: October 10th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
    • AWESOME!!!

  • Blah Said: October 10th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
    • Legal whatever, it’s in an area of the country where the cost of living is through the roof

  • JohnM Said: October 10th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
    • I have my “No on 8″ bumper sticker and yard sign right next to my Obama/Biden bumper sticker and yard sign. Obama only needs to give a “10 second” video sound bite that could air on all the news stations and also be incorporated into the No on 8 commercials. That would go a really long way to helping to defeat Prop 8.

  • Stephano Said: October 10th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
    • Great news, your neighbours to your north hope one day your whole country will have this equality!

      S
      Toronto, Canada

  • Wayne Said: October 10th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
    • YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sadly, this should teach us that we cannot rely on Politicians and their false promises to do anything for us, we have to take our fight for equality to the courts.

  • Wayne Said: October 10th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
    • sooner Said:
      I am concerned about how close Proposition 8 is polling in CA. Wouldn’t it help if Obama gave a 20 minute speech in CA explaining why it’s important to defeat the measure? Obama is a great speaker with huge support in CA, and if he just rallied the troops in CA on the issue we could defeat Proposition 8. The gay marriage ruling in CA was a great moment for us, and now we are in danger of losing it. Since we are supporting Obama in massive measure shouldn’t we expect him to help us in CA on a measure that is so important to us and on which we have worked for so long?

      —————

      I’ve been asking the same question. Why support a Politician who refuses to support our equality when we really need it. Nice speeches mean nothing if they are not followed by action!

  • Qjersey Said: October 10th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
    • I am so tired of this “will of the people” nonsense. At the time, the will of the people would have NOT ended slavery or segregation. THAT is why we have constitutions, to protect us from the “will of the people.” AND what no one talks about is that even a state or federal amendment will wind up in court because of “constitutional conflicts.” No gay marriage added to a constitution violates the “equal protection” clauses in the federal constitution (and most state constitutions).

  • Julia Said: October 10th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
    • You took the words out of my mouth, Shawn. As a straight ally of the gay community, I couldn’t be happier. Just remember that being ‘ON the right’ doesn’t always mean ‘IN the right’.

  • Barb Said: October 10th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
    • What a glorious day for Connecticut! Contratulations to everyone who worked so hard to obtain EQUALITY under the law. I bet the religiousa are busy at work right now crafting a proposition to take EQUALITY away once again in Conn. It is a terrible waste to see this happening here in California where over $40 million is being spent fighting the proposition that wants to enshrine discrimination in the California Constitution. We’ve voted for this right, we’ve petitioned and worked and even participated in the San Francisco marriages in 2004 to bring attention to the inequities. Now we are fighting again to KEEP our civil rights; fighting against money coming in from outside of California. Democracy is a strange creature indeed, but we will continue this struggle until all our gay and lesbian brothers and sister have the civil rights that ALL Americans are entitled to. PEOPLE: Separation of Church and State is ESSENTIAL to good government for ALL. 11,700 gay marriages in California (estimate) since June; they can’t take that away. Enjoy your weddings in Connecticut. Your case won because it was the right decision; domestic partnerships are NOT marriages. Celebrate! bb

  • JohnM Said: October 10th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
    • Wayne,

      Obama has publically supported us from the beginning of his campaign when he made equality for LGBT people a standard part of his stump speech, even before socially conservative audiences. In the US Senate, he was a co-sponsor of ENDA (which McCain opposed) and voted for hate crimes (which McCain voted against).

      In the last 3 weeks before the election, Obama certainly has huge demands on his time. What we need now are the Barney Franks and the Tammy Baldwins and the Geoff Kors to ask Obama to give the “No on 8″ campaign a clear video sound bite to help defeat Prop 8. If the LGBT community leaders now forcefully request this, then we will get it. If they don’t, we wont. Obama beleives in equality for us, just visit his website or go to his rallies. What we need now are our leaders to get his ear to move him to greater action…any by the way, speeches by a presidential candidate are action.

 
Login

Register
Lost your password?


or Login with Facebook