RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

03/13/2009

VT: Wedding plans have wrench; will wedding planners hammer out win?

by Jeremy Hooper

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 200903130634state'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.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

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?
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/04/seventyfive_people_rally_to_cr.html#more

Posted by: TG | Apr 8, 2009 1:08:25 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails