Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Here's the Money Graph from th... | WA Supremes: Some Children Are... »

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Will Olympia Enact Civil Unions?

Posted by on July 26 at 8:30 AM

Granted, I’m a damn optimist. But this conclusion from Justice Madsen does leave me hopeful that civil unions are in Washington’s future.

The plaintiffs and their amici have clearly demonstrated that many day-to-day decisions that are routine for married couples are more complex, more agonizing, and more costly for same-sex couples, unlike married couples who automatically have the advantages and rights provided to them in a myriad of laws and policies such as those surrounding medical conditions (e.g., the right to be present in the hospital and to help make difficult decisions), probate (e.g., the right to inherit property), and health insurance (e.g., the ability to obtain coverage for a spouse through employment policies).

Many local governments and businesses have recognized the difficulties facing same-sex couples and, nationally, many leading companies provide for equivalent work benefit packages for gay and lesbian employees….

There may be “more just and humane” ways to further the State’s interests, Murgia, 427 U.S. at 317, but
the State has met its burden in demonstrating that DOMA meets the minimum scrutiny required by the constitution. However, given the clear hardship faced by same sex couples evidenced in this lawsuit, the legislature may want to reexamine the impact of the marriage laws on all citizens of this state.


CommentsRSS icon

using the phrase "just and humane" sounds like she's talking about animals in the pound.

Hi Amy,
Unfortunately civil unions is not enough. Evan Wolfson wrote an article for the Stranger about this a while back; here it is:
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=23780

No, civil unions are not the goal. But let's start there, and move forward. There appears to be a lot of political headway in favor of civil unions now, in no little part _because_ of the hurt caused by this hateful decision. It's a long battle ahead, and we should not refuse a step forward because we could not get all we wanted at once.

I see the point in getting civil unions first. However, keep in mind what happened recently in Connecticut, where some couples sued to be allowed to marry, and the judge turned them down saying that they had civil unions, and that should be enough. Civil unions are not a starting point, they are an end point.

Not really, Matias. Consider that the Connecticut judge is acting under the same mistaken ideas that the Washington courts are acting under now. When the time is ripe, the error in the Connecticut opinion will be as glaring as the error in the Washington decision (and all the other benighted decisions).

I know it's not much comfort . . . I'm sorry. It hits home for me too.

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).