Comments on: Washington: AP’s vote count shows hope for Senate

By: Theo

Theo — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 16:35:08 +0000

They now have 23 votes in the bag. It seems pretty clear that they will get 2 votes out of the remaining 8 uncommitted. So this is a done deal and the big fight is the referendum.

Unlike R71, which had a divided and very poorly funded opposition, this will be a big battle. 2012 will see a huge number of gay rights battles and resources will be taxed to the limit. But I would rank WA as priority number 1, followed closely by Maine.

You could argue that Maine should be first as this is their second attempt, but ultimately I think WA gets the top slot as we need a win on the West Coast. Anyway, both states are crucial. After these 2, I’d rank MD (if it should get as far as the ballot), and after that MN, NC and lastly the CA curriculum battle. We also need to defend the IA state senate from a GOP takeover and we need to defend the 4 GOP senators in NY who are being targeted for retribution by NOM. The question is whether the gay community will step up to the plate with money.

By: Eric in Oakland

Eric in Oakland — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 08:49:53 +0000

“Just one thing for the pro “marriage” moniker – know that polygamy activism is right around the corner. Those folks (who have genuine feelings on their issue, no doubt), will use the same legal arguments as the homosexual community to defend their rights – ‘equal protection for all.’”

Andrey, it doesn’t seem that you are familiar with the legal arguments, if you believe that. The two issues aren’t remotely similar legally or logically. You might just as well say bestiality or incest as polygamy.

By: Andrey

Andrey — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 07:14:39 +0000

I cannot imagine being kept any legal distance from my wife just to suit some other person’s social comfort ability. Politically speaking, I am somewhat libertarian, and I would never get in the way of two people who want any sort of legal union, in any form. As long as you don’t bother me or put my family in danger, I really don’t care what you do with your free time. I’m not going to get in anyone’s way. So, passing this recent law seems like a win for the folks who have been waiting for so long. I definitely have friends and colleagues who would be pleased.

Constitutionality – If “gay marriage” (legal/legislative emphasis being on the word “marriage”) is the current issue, then states have the constitutional right to decide for themselves. To the six states that have passed laws making it legal, I say, “More power to them!” This, of course, also means that other states have the right to pass laws against it (more power to them, too). Just one thing for the pro “marriage” moniker – know that polygamy activism is right around the corner. Those folks (who have genuine feelings on their issue, no doubt), will use the same legal arguments as the homosexual community to defend their rights – “equal protection for all.” When it comes to the law, I only demand consistency. If non-traditional marriage is okay, then that should apply to everyone, including ANY fringe groups who may or may not be out of touch with the rest of mainstream America.

By: Stefan

Stefan — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 04:10:36 +0000

I’ve heard reports that Rosemary McAuliffe has declared her support. Supposedly she wanted to read the bill first, which was released today.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 03:54:41 +0000

NOW considering. What a difference one letter makes

Thanks

By: tristram

tristram — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 03:42:08 +0000

“Democrats Brian Hatfield of Raymond, Jim Kastama of Puyallup and Paull Shin of Edmonds have previously voted against expanding rights but are NOT considering supporting the equality bill.”

not or now?

By: Bryan

Bryan — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 23:54:02 +0000

Even if the senate vote fails this time there is still hope. Just look at what happened in New York. All a failure in the senate will mean is that it will be a couple more years before couples in WA can marry.