March 14th, 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:

  • INfinity Said: October 10th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
    • The power has shifted..It’s Time.

  • Karen Said: October 10th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
    • Obama won’t do it. I bet Hillary would. And Bill definitely should….to make up a little bit for signing that stupid DOMA.

  • O.R. Said: October 10th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
    • 3 down 47 to go. I am so happy, I’m 22 and have found the partner that I want to be with forever! It’s still hard to pick b/tween just 3 states to live in b/c of that, buuuuut its still expanding my options for moving out of this darn Mississippi!! Woooohoooo!

  • Wayne Said: October 10th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
    • Obama beleives in equality for us..JohnM.

      No Obama doesn’t believe in equality for us. Obama believes in a “Separate But Equal” sham called civil unions (the type that NJ couples have already discovered are not recognized as marriages even though civil unions are state law there). Separate But Equal is NOT equal and never has been. It’s a failed policy from the past that Obama of all people should be ashamed of pawning off unto the Gay community. And if Obama really cared about our equality he could spare 10 seconds to look into any of the thousands of video news cameras that follow him every minute of every day and simply say the words “Vote No on Prop 8″, but Obama won’t even spare 10 seconds of his time to fight for our equality. That’s pathetic.

  • Keith Said: October 10th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
    • This is definitely great news, especially since I live in Georgia where they have already banned same sex marriage AS well as civil unions. Those calling for Obama to give a speech or soundbite, in all reality will not get it. The Obama/Biden campaign has already come down the side against same sex marriage for political reasons, obviously. However, they have also made it clear that they would NOT stand in the way of states granting that persmission, nor would they allow an amendment to change our Constitution. Having him go out and support muchless praise towards the end of the campaign season would be more fodder for the right wingnuts and possible suicide. Ultimately, I see this winding up in the Supreme Court. Hopefully, they won’t happen until Obama has a chance to appoint the next two justices. Again, congratulations to Conneticut!

  • Wayne Said: October 10th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
    • “We conclude that, in light of the history of pernicious discrimination faced by gay men and lesbians, and because the institution of marriage carries with it a status and significance that the newly created classification of civil unions does not embody, the segregation of heterosexual and homosexual couples into separate institutions constitutes a cognizable harm,” Justice Richard N. Palmer wrote for the majority.

      It seems the Conn. Supreme Court understands what Obama either does not or refuses to admit. Civil Unions are not equal to marriages, a “Separate But Equal” policy is not equal and it never has been. And yet far too many young gays are supporting Obama even as Obama refuses to speak out against his own conservative supporters who are mobilizing in California to pass Prop 8. It’s time to wake up to reality. If Obama won’t stand up for our rights now, he never will. Support Politicians who support you. Everything else is just pretty speeches and lipservice.

  • Kathy, Australia Said: October 10th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
    • I cannot understand how a state constitution can (at the same time) include both an equal protection clause and ban a right to any single minority (in this case marriage to same sex attracted people) and be taken seriously.
      Wouldn’t any rights ban put into a constitution automatically render any equal protection clause irrelevant?

  • Michael Said: October 10th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
    • I believe Keith said it best – Obama/Biden will make equality a closer reality for us as opposed to McSame/Piglin…opps..Palin…however, those that like to say sep. isn’t equal forget the struggle that the blacks went through…they had to endure sep. but equal until the courts got involved and if we have to do the same we should because Civil Unions are better than no rights or less rights which is what we have now. Adding that if our Obama ticket wins, we hope the justices that are appointed will be on the side of equality and the constitution and pave the way to end this debate once and for all. Until then, we have to keep fighting for our rights, and keep our voices heard daily and with each State that embraces equality moves us a bit closer to our final goal.

  • Kerry Said: October 10th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
    • Looks like this battle will be won state by state.It will probably take years and years before gay marriage goes national.

  • Wayne Said: October 10th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
    • however, those that like to say sep. isn’t equal forget the struggle that the blacks went through…they had to endure sep.
      ——————-

      I totally disagree. The only good thing we can get from knowing our history is knowing not to repeat our mistakes! The Seperate But Equal policy was filled with decades of unequal and discriminatory treatment. Gay people have been waiting for equality since the friggin fall of Rome, we have waited enough. When you accept being 2nd class, you will always be treated as 2nd class. Support politicians that support your equality. Speeches are nice, but mean nothing without actions to back them up.

  • RICK Said: October 10th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
    • OK, FOLKS, I EMAILED OBAMA ON HIS WEBSITE-I ASKED HIM TO SPEAK OUT AND TO “VOTE NO ON PROPOPOSITION 8″, NOW, HAVE ANY OF YOU DONE ANYTHING TO LET HIM KNOW HOW YOU FEEL OR ARE YOU GOING TO LEAVE IT UP TO SOMEONE ELSE-OK , PEOPLE -GET INVOLVED !! AND CONGRATS TO CONNECTICUT !!!!

  • Wayne Said: October 10th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
    • OK, FOLKS, I EMAILED OBAMA ON HIS WEBSITE-I ASKED HIM TO SPEAK OUT AND TO “VOTE NO ON PROPOPOSITION 8″, NOW, HAVE ANY OF YOU DONE ANYTHING TO LET HIM KNOW HOW YOU FEEL OR ARE YOU GOING TO LEAVE IT UP TO SOMEONE ELSE-OK , PEOPLE -GET INVOLVED !! AND CONGRATS TO CONNECTICUT !!!!

      —————
      Rock on Rick!!! Get involved!

  • MikefromCanada Said: October 10th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
    • Conratulations Connecticut!! America is getting it, one step at a time.

  • JohnM Said: October 10th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
    • Obama has already publicly stated he is against Proposition 8. He has taken that action. He does support us. Direct quuotes from his website:

      Obama Voted Against a Federal Amendment
      to Ban Same‐Sex Marriage. Obama sided with
      the vast majority of Democrats opposing
      attempts by the Republican leadership to bring up a vote on a constitutional amendment to ban same sex‐marriage.

      Obama Opposes Discriminatory Constitutional Amendments. Obama “opposes all divisive and discriminatory Constitutional amendments, state or federal.” This includes the proposed amendments In California, Arizona and Florida.

      McCain “Proud” to Have Led an Effort to Ban Same‐Sex Marriage and Civil Unions In
      Arizona. McCain said “I’m proud to have led an effort in my home state to change our state Constitution to protect the sanctity of marriage between man and woman.”

      McCain Supports the California Gay Marriage Ban. In an e‐mail to protectmarriage.com, McCain said “I support the efforts of the people of California to recognize marriage as a
      unique institution between a man and a
      woman, just as we did in my home state.”
      McCain Says He Would Sign the Federal
      Marriage Amendment into Law. When asked
      if he would sign the federal marriage
      amendment if elected President, McCain
      replied, “of course,” although he voted against the amendment in the Senate.
      ___

      So Wayne, who are you supporting for President? Obama has said more on his website supportive of GLBT rights and relationships than any other candidite, Republican, Libertarian, or otherwise, running for President. In fact, McCain’s website does not mention GLBT people at all (we are completely invisible), although he does have a link to almost every other minority group.

      Agreed, LBGT leaders need to put pressure on Obama to do a sound bite against prop 8. But withhold out votes, or vote for homophobic McCain or Barr, please – don’t insult our intelligence.

 
Login

Register
Lost your password?


or Login with Facebook