Governor Chris Gregoire of Washington State will be approving a bill that gives gay and lesbian couples the same state-provided benefits as heterosexual couples. The bill has been called the "everything but marriage" bill, and as you might guess, it gives same-sex couple everything but the title of "marriage". This is certainly one step in the right direction, though I hope Washington will make an even bigger step in the near future.
– Dewitt
Perhaps I am just being overly critical, but all of this “everything but…” nonsense smacks of “Separate but Equal” legislation that was previously proven to be inherently unequal. Shouldn’t it be up to the specific church if they want to allow gay couples to marry? If there really is a separation between church and state (which there obviously is NOT, but I digress,) then marriage is just a word.
I think it’s great that people are finally realizing that rights are being withheld from citizens, but it just doesn’t seem to make sense that the only reason behind it is a religious one.
Read any history book and it will tell you that marriage wasn’t a religious right of passage. It was a transference of property from the father of the bride to another man (the husband.)
First your argue claiming it’s about equal rights, and then you get the rights, and now your arguing over the semantics about the word. Give me a break!
You got what you guys asked for, quit bitching!
I agree with Dewitt…it is a step in the right direction. These things take time especially since this is not a federal issue. It’s going to take each state to approve and that’s a long twisting road, but hopefully in the end it will be worth it. We need these rights, and the only way its going to happen is if we stick together and persevere. We’ve come a long way and now it’s time to take the next step, which is another long way. Let’s leave a legacy for our children (Even if they are adopted)
Marc-
“you guys”, what are you talking about? Did you somehow get lost on your way to the straight men’s gay-bashing club? Separate is NOT equal! No further discussion necessary.
So your telling me everything has to be the same for everybody all the time or something is wrong? In an ideal world, maybe, but, Uh sorry, no. That’s just not how the real world works, and it never will.
And it’s not seperate, it’s the same thing.
If you have a red bus, and it goes a certain route, charges a certain fee etc, and there’s a yellow bus that goes the same route, same price, and they only difference is that it’s yellow as apposed to red, arguing about the color difference is pretty petty. Exactly what this is..
Marc-
You really need to do some serious research about Brown vs. the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. Until then, you clearly have no clue!
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court declaring that state laws that established separate public schools for black and white students denied black children equal educational opportunities.
The fact that the separate educational facilities were inherently unequal made it wrong. Blacks didn’t have the same opportunities whites did.
Just because the word is different doesn’t mean the rules are different. The rights you’ve wanted you’ve achieved, you can get married like straight people with all of the same laws applying with no exceptions aside from the fact it’s not called “marriage”.
Now is it just me or isn’t equal rights exactly what you’ve been wanting all along…
End of story…
Actually, Marc, you are absolutely incorrect. If you read the Brown case, the Supreme Court did not rule that separate facilities were unacceptable because they weren’t really equal facilities. To quote the unanimous opinion of the court: “We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of “separate but equal” has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”
Separate “marriage-like” facilities are also inherently unequal, because one (marriage) is recognized no matter where you go in the country–or at least was, until states started refusing to recognize ONLY same-sex marriages from other states, which will almost certainly be struck down eventually. The other (civil unions, domestic partnerships, whatever) is inherently a state-by-state option that confers exactly nothing when you cross state lines.