By L. K. Regan
Published Sep 01, 2009

It was a joyful first of September in Vermont this week as the state's first legal same-sex marriages were performed. There is troubling news, however, from the opposite coast, where anti-gay marriage activists have mustered enough signatures to force a November ballot measure on the state's recently legalized domestic partner benefits. Sometimes it feels like it's one step forward, one step back in the gay marriage battle. Here are the highs and lows from this week.

In 2000, the state of Vermont was the first to legalize civil unions, a legal category that attempted to form a kind of marital parallel track. Because the state was the first to offer any kind of legal status whatsoever to gay couples, it was initially flooded by couples eager to tie as much of the knot as they were allowed. Earlier this year, Vermont became one of five states to offer legal marriage—without an asterisk or any reservations—to gay couples. Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa already have legal same-sex marriages; New Hampshire will begin performing them on New Year's Day of 2010. Today, Vermonters had their first weddings—but in a sign of the changing times, the availability of gay marriages in nearby states means that what was once a mad rush toward civil union has become an ordinary trickle. The AP reports that Vermont officials report only a handful of requests from gay couples for licenses leading up to September first.

In Washington, on the other hand, the situation is rapidly deteriorating. In May of this year, Washington legislators approved an expansion to the state's domestic partner law that came to be called the "Everything but Marriage" law. Since 2007, Washington has had domestic partnerships that grant hospital visitation, funeral and organ donation decisions, and inheritance rights to registered couples. In 2008, the law was expanded to include more shared property rights and parental guardianship. The May expansion added extending benefits to partners of public employees and adoption and child support rights. These rights and benefits of marriage—minus the actual designation of marriage, of course—would apply to the nearly 6,000 domestic partners legally registered in the state.

We say "would apply" because, while the new law was supposed to go into effect this July, it has been held up by efforts to submit it to a referendum by election ballot. According to state law, this would require 120,000 signatures. This week, it was announced that that magic number has been reached, and the signatures authenticated. Though legal challenges remain, it appears likely that the "Everything but Marriage" law will appear on the November ballot as Referendum 71, promising another colossal legal fight bringing in huge political contributions, if the experience of Proposition 8 in California is any kind of guide.

We want to leave you on a hopeful note, however. For the month of September, Ben & Jerry's popular ice cream "Chubby Hubby" when sold in Vermont will be renamed (and repackaged) as "Hubby Hubby." That's peanut butter-filled pretzels covered in fudge and surrounded by a vanilla-malt ice cream with fudge and peanut butter ripples. We'd marry that.

mookie5381 wrote:

As a Seattle resident, and someone who dabbles a bit in politics, I can say that it is likely R-71 will be approved (which is a good thing).

While it is true, the last time a gay rights measure was on the ballot (non-discrimination in housing and employment), it failed, and I-200 (making affirmative action illegal) passed, both of those were a long time ago, and the gay rights measure didn't get trounced.

What adds to my optimism for R-71 - Snohomish County, a county to the North of Seattle, has become more and more progressive over the years, and in a legislative district (21) that was once solidly Republican, there is now an openly gay man who's been elected in his own right.

Add to that an exciting County Executive race in King County (which Seattle is in), where both candidates (Dow Constantine, the Democrat, and Susan Hutchison, the "non-partisan" Republican) support R-71, and a really hot mayor's race in Seattle, pitting two gay marriage supporters against each other (after knocking off the incumbent in the primary), and we're looking at high turnout in the state's most populous and liberal county. Well, relatively high.

All in all, if R-71 wins in Snohomish, San Juan, Whatcom and Thurston counties, there's a high turnout in King County (above 50%), and the losses are stemmed in Spokane and Clark counties, then R-71 is approved. Hell, if the homophobes that make up Pierce county (the wannabe liberals that they are) can manage to vote to approve, then it will pass by a decent margin.

There. Political hypothesizing - done.

Sep 13 7:34 PM

ricmic wrote:

These United States of America portrays such a sad example of being United. Why can't these right wingers just mind their own business and let people live their lives as they choose. Does the family next door to you affect what happens in your household? Would someones life be miserable if their neighbor was two men or two women living together as a couple?
We are all human beings on the same earth. We were given an opportunity to live by the miracle of birth. Why do people feel they have to control other people in one way or another? If a Superior Court judge rules in favor a gay marriage or civil unions, then why do people feel they have to challenge that decision? Brain Washed Right Wingers! What other country in the world does this outside of the USA?
The Gays in this country, and there are lots of us from coast to coast, need to stand up and fight these right wingers to the ground. This is supposed to be a country founded on freedoms. Freedom to speak, to vote, choose your religion, to marry the person of choice no matter what their race is, to move where you wish to live? But not the freedom to marry the person you love who happens to be of the same sex. That is a bunch of bull crap!

Any straight couple out there who opposes gay marriage, can you list in order all of the criteria that has caused your marriage to become threatened or deteriorated in any way, by the fact that some states have approved gay marriage in this country?

Thanks for letting me unload.
Rick

Sep 07 5:29 AM

DropDeadKiley wrote:

As a Seattle resident, I can't tell you how infuriating this whole Referendum 71 ordeal has been. My friend and I actually listened to some of the petitioners, and they were downright lying about what the petition was for.
Now, it's true that over 35,000 signatures collected are suspected of being invalid and are being brought to Thurston county superior court to block the referendum from making the ballots, but even if it does, early polls show that the senate bill will be overwhelmingly reinforced by the public.

Whether or not that will shut the knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing rednecks in this state up once and for all is an entirely different question.

Sep 04 2:18 AM