Nevada Senate Passes Domestic Partnerships

Timothy Kincaid

April 22nd, 2009

According to the Las Vegas Review Journal, the state Senate approved a bill allowing domestic partners most of the same rights as married couples. The bill now goes to the Assembly for approval before facing an anticipated veto from the Governor. Although the bill did not pass with a veto-proof majority, the bill’s sponsor is will work to get the support needed to overcome a veto. One interesting quote came from Senate Minority Leader Bill Raggio, R-Reno:

Raggio said that he has talked with friends who are domestic partners and that they said Parks’ bill goes too far. The rights they want and really need concern medical, inheritance and funeral decisions, he said.

I call bullpoop. While I do think couples did tell him that they need medical, inheritance and funeral decisions, I do not think that a single solitary gay couple encouraged him to vote against the bill because “it goes too far”.

And it’s time that news reporters stop letting these “my gay friends” claims go unchallenged. They are not credible and should not be treated as such.

It’s time for reporters to look the Senator in the eye and say, “Produce them, Raggio.”


Sources in Nevada tell us that Raggio is scupulously honest. So if he says his gay friends told him it was “too far” then they probably did. They also pointed out that Raggio’s in his 80’s so his friends are probably from a different generation.


We’ve heard from another Nevada source that challenges Raggio’s integrity. This source shares that Raggio has a history of anti-gay attitudes and that his “friends who are domestic partners” may well be fictional.

So again, we are back in a situation in which a politician uses nameless unspecified “friends” as evidence that his position is the correct one. Is he a truthful guy with old conservative friends or is he a shameless politician saying what he needs to say to support his agenda? Unless he trots his friends out, we’ll never know.

Why do we let them get away with this?

Brian Torwelle

April 22nd, 2009

“most of the same rights as married couples”???

What does that mean exactly?

Christopher Waldrop

April 23rd, 2009

I’d like to know what “most of the same rights as married couples” means as well. And if Raggio is honest and if he really has gay friends who have a problem with the bill, they should come out and say what exactly in it “goes too far”. If the bill granted same-sex couples all the rights granted marriage I think I’d have an idea of what “too far” meant. I’m not saying I’d agree–I think same-sex couples should either be given all the same rights as heterosexual married couples or the government should get out of the marriage business. I’m just saying that I think I’d know what their problem was. It’s hard to know, though, how someone could complain that a bill that grants some rights but still gives same-sex unions a lesser status “goes too far”.

The great thing is this is Nevada. Remember in 2000 when Nevada voters passed a law banning same-sex marriages? The funniest thing I heard at the time was from Lewis Black who said (I’m paraphrasing) this is a state where you can throw away $15,000 at a roulette table then marry a hooker you’ve known for twenty minutes at a drive-through wedding chapel. But they wouldn’t want same-sex marriages because it might make Nevada seem sleazy.

Timothy Kincaid

April 23rd, 2009

Brian and Christopher,

My first commentary on the bill has a link to the language (pdf). The legislative counsel digest is:

This bill establishes a domestic partnership as a new type of civil contract recognized in the State of Nevada. Under the provisions of this bill, domestic partners have the same rights, protections, benefits, responsibilities, obligations and duties as do parties to any other civil contract created pursuant to title 11 of NRS. This bill also clarifies that a domestic partnership is not a marriage for the purposes of Section 21 of Article 1 of the Nevada Constitution.

Title 11 deals with marriage.

Nevada Blue

April 23rd, 2009

I’m getting sick of “my gay friends” too, along with black, women, Islamic, Christian friends. Support of the statement should be demanded every time.

And while there is always the possiblility of gaining new perspectives from “insider” information, no one person represents a whole group anyway.

With Raggio, I can also see a situation where maybe he yells at some poor employee that he knows is gay, “Now they’ve gone too far; don’t you agree?”
“well, yes I guess so, though I’d really like to see my partner if he becomes ill.”


April 23rd, 2009

To be fair, and to be accurate, Raggio didn’t say that he had GAY friends in domestic partnerships. He said he had FRIENDS in domestic partnerships.

If I understand the legislation correctly, it will be available to straight and gay couples.

It seems plausible to me that he does have friends in domestic partnerships who think the legislation goes too far, but they are STRAIGHT couples who have the option of marrying but probably chose not to for the very reason that they didn’t want all of the RESPONSIBILITIES of marriage. Such people would very likely complain that the domestic partner legislation goes too far.

Frankly I don’t think straight people should have a whole lot of say in what this legislation covers. They shouldn’t be allowed to strip it down to basics that THEY want so that they get TWO legal options while at the same time limiting the ONLY option offered to gay couples.

Anyway, I think it’s likely that if Raggio is telling the truth about his domestic partnership friends, they’re straight.


April 24th, 2009

bill’s sponsor is will work

Should be “bill’s sponsor will work”

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.


Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.