Comments on: Gay partnership measure approved by voters

By: Wayne M.

Wayne M. — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 13:37:33 +0000

This is good news and a step toward equality. However, it is not equality yet. We need to keep “our eyes on the prize” and never give up.

By: montrealbren

montrealbren — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:39:11 +0000

@DMGibson (and other naysayers)
“Doesn’t cut it”??
Are you saying you’d have voted the other way?! To deny domestic partnerships to those that want them?
I am fully aware of the argument you’re making, and I see the logic – but you can’t vote for things that are not on the ballot.
I doubt that anyone in a DP thinks their relationship is inferior to a marriage. I bet they’d even say they were “married”. If that’s the case, equality is a state of mind. Are YOU saying that a DP is less than marriage? How do you know? What if it’s BETTER than marriage?
Note that in France, the law that was essentially designed as a way to legally recognize gay partnerships (PACS) without calling it marriage is NOW MORE POPULAR THAN MARRIAGE among heterosexuals than it is among samesexers. That’s right, straight people are more interested in the DP than the marriage…

So it’s silly to jump to conclusions about DPs. They are more flexible than marriage: they have no federally recognized definition yet. It will be up to states that have DPs to decide what rights a DP has.

I refuse to get hung up on a word – I really don’t care if “other people” don’t think my relationship is as cool as theirs. I only care if I’m being denied my rights.

By: Matthew Simonds

Matthew Simonds — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:07:58 +0000

I’m glad that this passed, pissed that a rights issue ever got on the ballot, not thrilled at an separate (and inherently un)equal system.
But I’m also waiting to see what the Reject camps next move is going to be, as they are apparently calling doing polling (my mother got a call yesterday day so 2 days after the polls closed) to see how people felt about the possible approval of R71 and what their next move should be. It pretty clear its them because when she poshed to find what side there where for approve or reject they would not say (same as when they called before election day) and then when she told them she was happy it had been approved the line was silent then they hung up. (same thing they did before election when doing “polling” and she said she was voting approve)
So I wonder how long till the hypocrites try to get another Referendum/initiative going to try to get the voters to over turn their vote or try to go to court to over turn the vote, that they said was necessary because the voters are the best to make decisions on the direction of the state. (I would not put the later past them as they are in court trying to over turn the states open government law voted in by the voters in the 70′s, and they have a cause going to try to over turn voter approved campaign finance law)

By: MavsFan

MavsFan — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:53:05 +0000

“Everything But Marriage” sounds insulting. A step in the right direction, yes, but separate is NEVER equal!

By: mcjacob888

mcjacob888 — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:47:18 +0000

I just canceled a planned vacation to Maine, and am instead going to go to washington where my money is apparently more appreciated than it is in Maine.

By: Ginelle

Ginelle — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:10:45 +0000

Well the good news in this is that it is a step towards equality. And with every bit of good news, there is the bad news! And that is, it is still not “marriage”. Somewhere down the road, and not too far, someone will jump on the wagon and say that they cannot provide a service because the couple happen to be two men or two women, whatever the case may be. A similar scenario took place very recently in the South when a Justice of the Peace refused to grant a marriage license to a inter-racial couple because of his own personal prejudices and bigotry. When it comes to personal prejudices or religious beliefs for some people, they will find whatever loop holes available to them to avoid providing a service, despite the service they may have been hired to perform. In some states that formerly recognized “Civil Unions” for example, have had to concede that even these were less than “marriage” and are now scrambling to rewrite the law and get it passed and on the books. So, while I congratulate the State of Washington (our neighbour to the South) for taking this step towards equality, I think there are reservations to be considered by the Gay community as to the extent this law will provide in their equality rights.

By: tjr

tjr — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 15:40:02 +0000

You guys are congratulating Washington state?!? Had the name on this bill been same-sex marriage the results would have been different.

Same-sex marriage erks the majority of Americans and if Obama was to get involved it would certainly be political suicide.

By: Sara Amber

Sara Amber — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 08:10:52 +0000

I think in large part, the reason we did win was because the emphasis was on the legal aspects of domestic partnership. These rights were very consistently explained and expressed to the public at large, and thankfully the message got through.

When Kate Fleming drowned in her basement in 2006 and her partner wasn’t allowed into her hospital room to say her final goodbyes, that was when the movement began. Now, from a legal perspective, registered domestic partners have all the same legal rights and privileges as straight married couples do.

Marriage is a subject that is too emotional and baggage-laden for most of the citizens of eastern Washington right now. But they do understand being allowed paid time off if their partner is sick, for example.

Another reason why I think this referendum was approved was because in Washington state, straight couples can register as domestic partners if one partner is 62 years of age or older and they can’t get married for financial reasons. Out of 12,000 couples registered as domestic partners, several hundred are heterosexual. Their votes count too.

By: Fred Stanley

Fred Stanley — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 02:13:09 +0000

I was born and grew up in Seattle. Hooray for Washington State! I am now stuck in California, but got legally married before Proposition 8. Someday we will prevail!

By: David M. Gibson

David M. Gibson — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 01:36:31 +0000

Sorry, folks . . . but that just doesn’t cut it. Homosexuals must have the “exact” same rights of heterosexuals. Nothing less will simply not do; not now, not ever. Why should we “settle” for anything less? Are we less than heterosexuals? I think not. People, if you settle for less, you’ll get less. Don’t stand for it.