VT: Wedding plans have wrench; will wedding planners hammer out win?
CA: Legislature twice passes a marriage bill, but governor refuses to sign.
NY: State assembly and back-to-back governors support a marriage equality bill, but the state senate fails to come around.
NJ: Supreme court offers ruling that could have granted marriage equality, but the legislature choose to take the civil unions route instead.
We gays are used to seeing the stars almost align, only to then be pulled out of the sky by a certain governmental person or body. Now the same situation is arising in Vermont, where the state legislature is poised to bump up that state's civil unions system to full marriage equality, while at the same time, Republican governor Jim Douglas is making his opposition to same-sex nups more known than ever before.
The AP (via Wash. Blade) has more:
Douglas says Vermont's civil unions law is good the way it is, and he says the state doesn't need a "divisive" debate on the topic.
Vt. gov. says he opposes same-sex marriage [AP/Wash Blade]
Though there is a silver lining to this un-Ben&Jerry's-like scoop of poop. It is believed that the legislature might have a veto-proof majority, making Douglas' opposition, for all intents and purposes, about as important to equality advocates as whether or not dear aunt Sally plans to drunkedly do the wedding chicken dance at their forthcoming ceremonies.
Hearings begin Monday on the marriage bill introduced by senator Pete Shumlin (D-Putney). We'll keep monitoring the progression, while hoping Gov. Douglas will temper his regression.
It tells me why we'll never have equality if we leave it to elected officials. But we will have it through acts of the courts.
Posted by: Tony P | Mar 13, 2009 5:25:58 PM
Why is it people who have their rights always proclaim second-best is "good enough" for us?
Posted by: Buffy | Mar 14, 2009 2:54:32 AM
Next stop, Cleveland?
Posted by: TG | Apr 8, 2009 1:08:25 AMcomments powered by Disqus