Connecticut Bill Would Update Law For Same-Sex Marriages

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

STEPHANIE REITZ | March 6, 2009 08:50 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
RETRANSMISSION of a graphic that moved Nov. 5, 2008; graphic shows same-sex relationship laws by states

HARTFORD, Conn. — As Connecticut lawmakers consider updating state law to conform with a court ruling that allows same-sex marriages, opponents of gay marriage fear their effort will go too far to promote homosexuality.

The legislators' work is spurred by last year's state Supreme Court decision that concluded same-sex couples have the right to wed in Connecticut. The state's 2005 civil union law doesn't give same-sex couples equal status of married heterosexual couples, the court said.

The General Assembly's judiciary committee is considering a bill to remove gender references in current state laws and transform same-sex civil unions into legally recognized marriages as of October 2010. The bill was the subject of a committee hearing Friday.

The measure also would strip language from a 1991 state anti-discrimination law that says Connecticut does not condone gay marriage and will not set quotas for hiring gay workers or encourage teaching in school about same-sex lifestyles. Some lawmakers consider the language outdated and unnecessary.

The proposal to delete that language has upset opponents, who think the court ruling could be used to affect social policy in other matters such as school curricula.

The Family Institute of Connecticut, which calls the court ruling undemocratic, said on its Web site that changing the 1991 law "goes beyond mere legislative housekeeping."

Peter Wolfgang, the organization's executive director, told the committee the proposed changes could be interpreted by "some enterprising judge" or others as encouragement to teach about homosexual lifestyles in schools.

"We don't want this misread as some sort of affirmation, some sort of mandate, that things that are opposed to in parental rights or traditional public beliefs will now be taught in the public schools," Wolfgang said.

Story continues below

Waterbury resident Robert Muckle Sr. told lawmakers he worries about the effect on children if same-sex relationships are condoned or encouraged by educators.

"Things are bad enough in our schools with the teaching of comprehensive sex education without the added promotion of homosexuality and bisexuality," he said.

State Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven, co-chairman of the judiciary committee, said the 1991 language prohibited actions that were never likely to occur anyway, such as setting quotas for hiring gay workers or pushing teachers to promote homosexuality.

It was added only to appease people who otherwise might have blocked the anti-discrimination bill, Lawlor said.

The language is a vestige of past discrimination that should be removed, said attorney Bennett Klein of Boston-based Gay and Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), which represented the gay couples who won the Supreme Court decision.

"It's meaningless language other than to express prejudice," he said.

State Rep. Beth Bye, D-West Hartford, whose ceremony with her partner, Tracey Wilson, was Connecticut's first same-sex marriage, said the updates to state law are much more than mere procedure.

"Marriage has meaning in our culture, and marriage has meaning in our state and to my family," Bye, displaying her marriage license, told fellow lawmakers Friday.

The judiciary committee did not act Friday on the proposed changes, which would require full General Assembly approval.

Only Connecticut and Massachusetts have legalized gay marriage, although the unions were legal in California for five months until a state referendum to ban gay marriage passed last fall.

Vermont, New Jersey, California, New Hampshire, Oregon, Washington and the District of Columbia have laws that either recognize civil unions or domestic partnerships that afford same-sex couples similar rights to marriage. Thirty states have gay marriage bans in their constitutions.

Connecticut had 2,140 civil unions recorded as of Friday, including 24 since the Oct. 10 Supreme Court decision.

Some church and conservative group leaders also want lawmakers to let Connecticut justices of the peace and anyone else with religious objections _such as wedding photographers or florists _ refuse to participate in same-sex ceremonies.

"A situation has been created by the (court) decision where state policy seriously conflicts with the religious beliefs of a large number of people within the state," said David Reynolds, a spokesman for the Connecticut Catholic Conference.

The law would exempt clergy from performing same-sex marriages based on their religious beliefs. However, some legislators say justices of the peace are state officials and must perform the ceremonies, since they are legally prohibited from discriminating based on sexual orientation.

HARTFORD, Conn. — As Connecticut lawmakers consider updating state law to conform with a court ruling that allows same-sex marriages, opponents of gay marriage fear their effort will go too far ...
HARTFORD, Conn. — As Connecticut lawmakers consider updating state law to conform with a court ruling that allows same-sex marriages, opponents of gay marriage fear their effort will go too far ...
 
Comments
21
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- RTIII I'm a Fan of RTIII 109 fans permalink

"Things are bad enough in our schools with the teaching of comprehensive sex education without the added promotion of homosexuality and bisexuality,"

Comprehensive sex education is _bad?_

"A situation has been created by the (court) decision where state policy seriously conflicts with the religious beliefs of a large number of people within the state,"

And the author of such a sentence doesn't understand that it's the very foundation of this democracy to _not_ enshrine religious beliefs in law?

-sigh-

What an enlightened group.
.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:35 PM on 03/07/2009
- suejester I'm a Fan of suejester 7 fans permalink
photo

It is a ridiculous arguement. I

have been constantly exposed to the "heterosexual lifestyle", I even experimented a bit with heterosexuality, and well nope...I'm still gay, and the "heterosexual lifestyle" does have a much bigger resources of "special rights" over the "homosexual lifestyle".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:23 AM on 03/07/2009
- rextrek I'm a Fan of rextrek 39 fans permalink
photo

Lets face it - when you boil it ALL down - it comes down to SEX...these "Anti" people can't think about anything else BUT the sex......it's the Ultimate "ICK" factor.....LGBT people like everyone else are MORE THEN thier sex lives.....they can't seem to grasp this concept,that LGBT people are regular people..with Hopes,dreams,worrys...etc.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:13 AM on 03/07/2009
- MadamRoma I'm a Fan of MadamRoma 12 fans permalink

Gays in this country should use the internet to buy from gay friendly states. I buy everything but food items that cannot be shipped gay friendly states. One would be surprised the difference 10% of the population buying from gay friendly states could make. Hit them in the pocketbook, money seems to be the only thing the right winger bible swingers understand.......and let me add, GAYS ARE BIG SHOPPERS!!!

I buy nothing from the SOUTH, there are parts of the south that are downright hostile to gays. I won't even drive in Texas, Oklahoma and Alabama.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:34 AM on 03/07/2009

Great idea!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:22 AM on 03/07/2009
photo

The part that cracks me up is that public school only barely really teaches s.e.x ed, and their worried about homosexual ed.

Too funny.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:58 AM on 03/07/2009

This idea of "promoting homosexuality or bisexuality" is about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. If you are heterosexual, no amounting of promoting will change your mind about that. I mean, as a man, I don't care how many commercials for Tampax I see, I ain't buying any!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:15 AM on 03/07/2009
- johnie2xs I'm a Fan of johnie2xs 62 fans permalink
photo

I agree. The whole idea that 'heteros' could have their sexual preference changed is the refuge of these small thinkers who can't wrap their minds around the "nature" aspect of homosexuality. I have a friend from Idaho, who along with his wife, are adamant regarding this fact. As many times as I've discussed the subject with them, no matter how logical an argument I construct, they just refuse to give an inch. How a person can reach such a level of intractability in the face of logic, to me is an amazement. It's been said that one of the biggest failings of our educational systems has been its failure in teaching critical thinking. I believe that to be a gross understatement.
People in this country just cannot accept any given belief of theirs being challenged. Their immediate response is visceral; a personal affront. To admit they could be wrong is perceived as a sign of weakness, yet by refusing to couch a new idea only proves how lame their stances are, and stymies intellectual growth.
It seems in just a few generations, in this country, we have sullied thought processes to a point of non-existence in the general population. I blame religion's reliance on Faith as the cause for the diminution of logical thought.
Faith is a linchpin of religion, but an obstacle of logic. Faith, in logic, is called "hypothesis"; it needs to be proven, one way or another, it only needs to be accepted in religion.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:07 AM on 03/07/2009

You forgot to mention that Americans are a mean-spirited, nasty bunch. As a European, it always amuses me to see how much energy some people in this country will spend trying to ruin other people's lives. From the tax to the justice system to proposition 8, it is all about "Hate thy neighbor!"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:27 AM on 03/07/2009
- cckev529 I'm a Fan of cckev529 4 fans permalink
photo

I was in Australia from August to December, so I didn't get to vote in the election (I'm a Connecticut resident). I was incredibly disheartened to hear that Prop 8 passed in CA. So much so, that I didn't find out that my home state of CT passed gay marriage until last month!! And what a wonderful surprise that was to read it in an article online one morning! lol! It makes me feel good to actually be able to say I can get married like everyone else can. :)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:02 AM on 03/07/2009

The tried to attack it again this past Nov. with a request to have a constitutional convention. It was shot down... Sneaky bastards :-)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:35 AM on 03/07/2009
- Nepe I'm a Fan of Nepe 2 fans permalink

LoL, they think that the law promotes homosexuality. Look you are either a homosexual or not. I don't think someone is going to wake up one day and say "I think I will be a homosexual today." I think this is a good step in equal rights for all US citizens.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:37 AM on 03/07/2009
- slaxx I'm a Fan of slaxx 38 fans permalink
photo

oh brother. should we also not teach children about d.r.u.g.s since it's "exposing them."

no one is requiring teachers to teach about homosexuality you tools!!!

besides 1 in 10 of those"innocent" children is gay anyway.

why are people so o.b.s.e.s.s.e.d with the idea of gay people? we're all the same species!!

grow up, people!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:05 AM on 03/07/2009
photo

You have a point.

Any sort of talking about an issues, such as d.r.u.g.s with kids is seen as exposing them to it, and we don't want to do that. It's better to let the parents do it.

Then half the parents don't, and kids learn about these issues on their own, leading to great societal outcries.

Then we still don't discuss the issues, for fear of exposure.

I wonder if anyone has taken the time to notice that these kids they are trying to shelter, these innocents, have access to the internet?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:02 AM on 03/07/2009
- slaxx I'm a Fan of slaxx 38 fans permalink
photo

oh brother. should we also not teach children about drugs since it's "exposing them."

no one is requiring teachers to teach about homosexuality you tools!!!

besides 1 in 10 of those"innocent" children is gay anyway.

why are people so obsessed with the idea of gay people? we're all the same species!!

grow up, people!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:52 AM on 03/07/2009
- Nyssa Cruz I'm a Fan of Nyssa Cruz 2 fans permalink
photo

What a beautiful state that is as well as others that are GLBT friendly. Although I live in Texas, I am not sure if it will ever happen, I know that knowing somewhere in this great country I am first class and not second class citizen. Vive le Humanity! Great job Conn.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:11 AM on 03/07/2009
- Nepe I'm a Fan of Nepe 2 fans permalink

It might happen, you never know. The younger generation seems to be more interested in governmental affairs (considering the election). Already on campus I can see more proactive students. Take heart.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:02 AM on 03/07/2009
- Crowhaul I'm a Fan of Crowhaul 13 fans permalink
photo

A basic rule in this country - like it or not - is 'equal application of the law'. And by playing a lopsided hand in the marriage game, government is creating a de facto second class citizenry.

The only end-game solution for government is to get out of the marriage game.

It was never their purview to decide which citizens, indeed, could marry. And then, after deciding which citizens can marry, to dole out benefits based on an obviously unequal application of the law.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:09 AM on 03/07/2009
- Nepe I'm a Fan of Nepe 2 fans permalink

I agree, government should stay out of the marriage game. Everyone gets the same governmental privileges under marriage or no one gets them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:00 AM on 03/07/2009
- dm10003 I'm a Fan of dm10003 17 fans permalink
photo

but it will always be more than separation of terms for the bigots.

this article covers public education and other ways bigots think "promotes homoseuality and bisexuality" that mere fairness and terminology can't fix for them. bigots want to punish us in any way they can, logic or fairness or justice be damned.

they have uncleanable god-goggles!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:07 AM on 03/07/2009
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect