Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gay advocates pleased but unsatisfied with Conn. civil unions, say they plan to push for marriage
WTNH Television ^ | 4/21/2005 | Puppage

Posted on 04/21/2005 5:07:58 AM PDT by Puppage

(Hartford, Conn.-AP, Apr. 21, 2005 6:00 AM) _ Gay rights proponents had been hoping that Connecticut would follow the lead of neighboring Massachusetts by allowing same-sex couples to marry.

That's why they were pleased but still unsatisfied Wednesday when Connecticut offered civil unions to gay couples, becoming the first state to do so voluntarily, without being forced by the courts.

"As important as the rights are, this is not yet equality," said Anne Stanback, executive director of Love Makes a Family, a statewide gay rights organization.

Vermont is the other state to allow civil unions, which carry the rights and privileges of marriage without the marriage license. Massachusetts allows gay couples to marry. But those changes came about after same-sex couples won court battles.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell, a Republican, signed the bill about an hour after it was approved 26-8 by the Democrat-controlled Senate. The law, which takes effect Oct. 1, includes an amendment that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. Civil unions are reserved only for same-sex couples.

"I have said all along that I believe in no discrimination of any kind and I think that this bill accomplishes that, while at the same time preserving the traditional language that a marriage is between a man and a woman," Rell said.

According to the 2000 census, there are 7,400 same-sex couples in Connecticut.

Jeffrey Busch, who lives in Wilton, said he would likely take advantage of the law and engage in a civil union with his partner, Stephen Davis.

"But we're not going to celebrate a civil union like a marriage," said Busch, an administrative law judge in New York. "If it had everything a marriage has, it would be called a marriage."

Busch and Davis are one of seven same-sex couples who sued in Connecticut last summer after being denied marriage licenses; the case has not been resolved.

Some gay marriage proponents say the new law means they will have to wait awhile before asking the state Legislature to revisit the issue and consider gay marriage.

"I think we are all going to have to step back and take a deep breath and realize that we need to understand the world is not going to change as the result of this legislation," said Democratic Sen. Andrew McDonald, co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee and one of a handful of openly gay legislators.

"We'll have an opportunity to see how it unfolds as unions start in October of this year," said McDonald, who supports Connecticut opening its marriage laws to same-sex couples.

Opponents had hoped to persuade Rell to veto the bill, saying civil unions are essentially gay marriage.

Roman Catholics and pro-marriage activists plan a rally Sunday in opposition to the bill.

Marie Hilliard, executive director of the Connecticut Catholic Conference, said the civil union proposal "got more legs than we ever hoped it would get." About 44 percent of the state's 3 million residents are Roman Catholic.

Brian Brown, head of the Family Institute of Connecticut, said his group intends to keep the issue squarely before the public.

"From now until 2006, our mission will be to let every person know in the state of Connecticut which lawmakers voted to redefine marriage, and which lawmakers voted to protect marriage," he said.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Connecticut; Unclassified
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last
Why don't they let the people od Connecticut vote on this issue?
1 posted on 04/21/2005 5:07:59 AM PDT by Puppage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Connecticut homo's...Is'nt that special?


2 posted on 04/21/2005 5:10:23 AM PDT by Route101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah; EdReform; DirtyHarryY2K; Clint N. Suhks

ping.


3 posted on 04/21/2005 5:12:14 AM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

We need a referendum question for the 2008 ballot. If an informed group could find out the impact, ie. higher insurance, reduction of income tax collection, we could show how this hurts us in the form of high taxes for normal people.

I heard there's a rally in Hartford this weekned. The race is Saturday night, so I may be available if my daughters don't have thier Lacrosse jamboree. Anyone have any details?


4 posted on 04/21/2005 5:17:41 AM PDT by Fierce Allegiance (Eliminate the MIF (Mexican Invasion Force))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
Civil unions are reserved only for same-sex couples.

Do the couplings require license and subsequent consumation to be 'valid'? LOL

5 posted on 04/21/2005 5:18:33 AM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
"I think we are all going to have to step back and take a deep breath and realize that we need to understand the world is not going to change as the result of this legislation," said Democratic Sen. Andrew McDonald, co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee and one of a handful of openly gay legislators.

LOL

6 posted on 04/21/2005 5:24:29 AM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
"As important as the rights are, this is not yet equality," said Anne Stanback, executive director of Love Makes a Family

Anne, You will never achieve "equality" because what you are trying to pass off as a family is not the same as a "natural" family, with a man and women committed to each other as parents. You can jump up and down and scream all you want, but the imitation families you are trying to pass off as real families are just not the same, they are not "equal".

Anne, your idea of family is different, it's not the same, it's not equal, it's "queer", "get used to it."

7 posted on 04/21/2005 5:28:01 AM PDT by joshhiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage; All

IN YOUR FACE !!!!


8 posted on 04/21/2005 5:30:58 AM PDT by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

So then, they're going to "keep pushing until they're statisfied".

That shouldn't be surprising.


9 posted on 04/21/2005 5:52:49 AM PDT by PBRSTREETGANG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Because if it were allowed they would lose the vote.


10 posted on 04/21/2005 6:42:48 AM PDT by Piquaboy (22 year veteran of the Army, Air Force and Navy, Pray for all our military .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Piquaboy
Because if it were allowed they would lose the vote

I agree, but even that didn't stop the San Francisico mayor from performing illegal ceremonies earlier this year. I guess he just knows better.

11 posted on 04/21/2005 7:26:21 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Liberals are all smarter than we homophobes out in flyover country.


12 posted on 04/21/2005 7:28:47 AM PDT by Piquaboy (22 year veteran of the Army, Air Force and Navy, Pray for all our military .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Piquaboy

LOL. And, more caring ,too.


13 posted on 04/21/2005 7:29:16 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: EdReform; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; stage left; Yakboy; I_Love_My_Husband; ...

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

Later today if I can sneak the time I'll post my list of quotes from homosexual spokespeople revealing that they REALLY want "gay" marriage so as to destroy the meaning of marriage and family. They want to destroy the social fabric. They want to destroy the timeless foundation of society which is the natural family.

Let me know if you want on/off this pinglist.


14 posted on 04/21/2005 10:32:49 AM PDT by little jeremiah (Resisting evil is our duty or we are as responsible as those promoting it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
Well DUH!!!!! Trying to tell politicians that this will happen, is like talking to a brick wall!! What do ya know, it's true!

Congress better stop ignoring the warnings given them by their constituents. Every social or cultural experiment this country has tried, every time, the result turns out to be worse than opponents ever imagined. When will they learn?
15 posted on 04/21/2005 10:42:43 AM PDT by gidget7 (Get GLSEN out of our schools!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gidget7
When will they learn?

Several years after they are defeated...if ever.

16 posted on 04/21/2005 10:44:26 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

There are times I think that people will not be happy until sodomy is required learning in school.


17 posted on 04/21/2005 10:44:55 AM PDT by TXBSAFH (Never underestimate the power of human stupidity--Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Fierce Allegiance
I have no more information than you do.

I agree a referendum is in order. Drafters of such a referendum might also site loss of taxes due to middle class families moving out of the state. MA is the ONLY state in the union with negative growth via census. The ONLY reason it was roughly 4000, and not a whole lot higher, is they counted college students, who once they graduate DO NOT STAY! And they counted illegal immigrants.
18 posted on 04/21/2005 10:46:51 AM PDT by gidget7 (Get GLSEN out of our schools!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
They also want to destroy our moral fabric. They want moral relativism, which is NOT even an actual term. It's an invented one, which means amoral, or no morals at all. Anything goes, so long as desires, no matter how perverted are acceptable. And they actually believe we can be forced to accept these morals.

That alone should make us so mad we start taking loud steps to stop it.
19 posted on 04/21/2005 10:51:39 AM PDT by gidget7 (Get GLSEN out of our schools!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TXBSAFH

In some school districts it already is, and it is required by the courts via the ACLU! And not just sodomy, but how lesbians can and do have sex.


20 posted on 04/21/2005 10:54:10 AM PDT by gidget7 (Get GLSEN out of our schools!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson