Gay RI House speaker takes heat for m...

Gay RI House speaker takes heat for marriage vote

There are 12 comments on the The Atlanta Journal-Constitution story from May 18, 2011, titled Gay RI House speaker takes heat for marriage vote. In it, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that:

For the first openly gay House speaker in the nation, the protests were personal.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

“Married 6/17/08”

Since: Feb 07

Porterville, CA

#1 May 18, 2011
In politics it is unfortunate that sometimes you have to choose between half of what you want or none of what you want. Then come back later for the rest of what you want.

A step forward is better than moving backward or standing still.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#2 May 18, 2011
jcofe wrote:
In politics it is unfortunate that sometimes you have to choose between half of what you want or none of what you want. Then come back later for the rest of what you want.
A step forward is better than moving backward or standing still.
But if Rhode Island recognizes a Same-Sex Couples marriage from another state.......why would they want to settle for less from their home state?

Sorry, but it makes no true sense..........maybe Fox isn't clueless, but settling for less now......could backfire later!!!

“The Buybull is innerrrent.”

Since: Jun 08

Silver Spring, MD

#3 May 18, 2011
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
But if Rhode Island recognizes a Same-Sex Couples marriage from another state.......why would they want to settle for less from their home state?
Sorry, but it makes no true sense..........maybe Fox isn't clueless, but settling for less now......could backfire later!!!
We know pushing for marriage equality in R.I. this year would have backfired immediately, not later.

All you need do is look how anti sodomy laws, anti abortion laws, anti miscegenation laws and segregation laws all got knocked down: Bit by bit over many years.(And this is true even in the instances where such progress has, in fact, been chipped away at by the usual talibangelical morons.)

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#4 May 18, 2011
writewingproxycontin wrote:
<quoted text>
We know pushing for marriage equality in R.I. this year would have backfired immediately, not later.
All you need do is look how anti sodomy laws, anti abortion laws, anti miscegenation laws and segregation laws all got knocked down: Bit by bit over many years.(And this is true even in the instances where such progress has, in fact, been chipped away at by the usual talibangelical morons.)
Well, you may be right......but if a Same-Sex Couple can have their legal marriage recognized and have ALL the rights, benefits and privileges of marriage.......why settle for a fraction of the rights, benefits and privileges under another title or term that requires an explanation? That's what I don't understand.......are some of these states waiting to see the outcome in California before they simply realize the separate but equal ISN'T equal at all or what?

I mean I understand a Civil Union IF a State offers NOTHING......but if a State offers out-of-state recognition.......why settle for less?

“The Buybull is innerrrent.”

Since: Jun 08

Silver Spring, MD

#5 May 18, 2011
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you may be right......but if a Same-Sex Couple can have their legal marriage recognized and have ALL the rights, benefits and privileges of marriage.......why settle for a fraction of the rights, benefits and privileges under another title or term that requires an explanation? That's what I don't understand.......are some of these states waiting to see the outcome in California before they simply realize the separate but equal ISN'T equal at all or what?
I mean I understand a Civil Union IF a State offers NOTHING......but if a State offers out-of-state recognition.......why settle for less?
You're not following along at the most basic level.

No pro glbt person is claiming civil unions are acceptable or equal to marriage equality.

The argument here is whether anything is to be gained by getting civil unions when we can until we can get marriage equality in R.I. There are some state, intermediary rights to be gained, and there is the setback to momentum to be avoided by not putting full marriage equality to a vote right now and losing.

And the person in the government there who can count and who is gay says we can't get marriage equality right now. Surely this is all clear enough to grasp.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#6 May 18, 2011
writewingproxycontin wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not following along at the most basic level.
No pro glbt person is claiming civil unions are acceptable or equal to marriage equality.
The argument here is whether anything is to be gained by getting civil unions when we can until we can get marriage equality in R.I. There are some state, intermediary rights to be gained, and there is the setback to momentum to be avoided by not putting full marriage equality to a vote right now and losing.
And the person in the government there who can count and who is gay says we can't get marriage equality right now. Surely this is all clear enough to grasp.
Please don't insult my intelligence.......I do understand the basic level of this discussion.......and yes, if there is no other solution......then Civil Unions are a start......but in Rhode island there is already a solution......GO MARRY IN ANOTHER STATE AND RETURN HOME......that marriage is then recognized!!!!

Problem solved!!!!

“The Buybull is innerrrent.”

Since: Jun 08

Parksley, VA

#7 May 18, 2011
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Please don't insult my intelligence.......I do understand the basic level of this discussion.......and yes, if there is no other solution......then Civil Unions are a start......but in Rhode island there is already a solution......GO MARRY IN ANOTHER STATE AND RETURN HOME......that marriage is then recognized!!!!
Problem solved!!!!
Obviously that does not solve the problem, which is how to get marriage equality at the federal level.(And I thought you were supporting the claim that the Speaker moving to vote on civil unions rather than marriage was a problem. Of course, by your marry-somewhere-else-and-retur n-to-R.I., the Speaker's choice for civil unions for now is not a problem. Because, "problem solved!!!!" [sic])

Part of that process of federal marriage equality is getting marriage equality in as many states as possible.

Part of that process is getting marriage equality in R.I.

Part of that process, unfortunately, is getting civil unions first in R.I.

It's all pretty simple to the point of being tedious. People giving the Speaker "heat" for his marriage votes either can't count votes or don't believe in counting votes.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#8 May 18, 2011
writewingproxycontin wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously that does not solve the problem, which is how to get marriage equality at the federal level.(And I thought you were supporting the claim that the Speaker moving to vote on civil unions rather than marriage was a problem. Of course, by your marry-somewhere-else-and-retur n-to-R.I., the Speaker's choice for civil unions for now is not a problem. Because, "problem solved!!!!" [sic])
Part of that process of federal marriage equality is getting marriage equality in as many states as possible.
Part of that process is getting marriage equality in R.I.
Part of that process, unfortunately, is getting civil unions first in R.I.
It's all pretty simple to the point of being tedious. People giving the Speaker "heat" for his marriage votes either can't count votes or don't believe in counting votes.
Again......if Rhode Island recognizes a marriage from out of state for a Same-Sex Couple, how is settling for Civil Unions in Rhode Island going to help overturn DOMA?

Wouldn't it help overturn DOMA by having MORE SAME-SEX COUPLES BE LEGALLY MARRIED than just having a Civil Union, which is only recognized in the State in which it is issued?

I think we understand each other.......just coming at this from different viewpoints......but I could be wrong!!!

“The Buybull is innerrrent.”

Since: Jun 08

Silver Spring, MD

#9 May 19, 2011
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Again......if Rhode Island recognizes a marriage from out of state for a Same-Sex Couple, how is settling for Civil Unions in Rhode Island going to help overturn DOMA?
Wouldn't it help overturn DOMA by having MORE SAME-SEX COUPLES BE LEGALLY MARRIED than just having a Civil Union, which is only recognized in the State in which it is issued?
I think we understand each other.......just coming at this from different viewpoints......but I could be wrong!!!
I agree that having more couple marry in, say, MA or CT, and then return to live in R.I. is helpful.

But in a state which cannot get its own marriage equality right now then civil unions is a good launching pad.

The way this works is illustrated by how anti sodomy laws were defeated: A majority of states had removed their state anti sodomy laws by the time of Hardwick. By the time of Lawrence, all but about seven (I'm guessing) had removed their anti sodomy laws.

_Then_ the Supreme Court decided to overturn all anti sodomy laws.

Same for getting Roe. Same for getting Brown v. Same for ditching anti miscegenation laws federally. You need a groundswell of state legislative and lower court movement on a particular, controversial issue before the US Supreme Court will change gears. Usually. Almost always.

Secondly, civil unions can show all but the really Christshariahn unpersuadables that glbt couplings with state benefits don't mean the end of civilization, thus helping move the reasonable, gradually, to tacit support for marriage equality.

So that should answer your question as to how civil unions contribute to marriage equality. But I must say, this explanation is really, really basic. We've been at this decades.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#10 May 19, 2011
writewingproxycontin wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree that having more couple marry in, say, MA or CT, and then return to live in R.I. is helpful.
But in a state which cannot get its own marriage equality right now then civil unions is a good launching pad.
The way this works is illustrated by how anti sodomy laws were defeated: A majority of states had removed their state anti sodomy laws by the time of Hardwick. By the time of Lawrence, all but about seven (I'm guessing) had removed their anti sodomy laws.
_Then_ the Supreme Court decided to overturn all anti sodomy laws.
Same for getting Roe. Same for getting Brown v. Same for ditching anti miscegenation laws federally. You need a groundswell of state legislative and lower court movement on a particular, controversial issue before the US Supreme Court will change gears. Usually. Almost always.
Secondly, civil unions can show all but the really Christshariahn unpersuadables that glbt couplings with state benefits don't mean the end of civilization, thus helping move the reasonable, gradually, to tacit support for marriage equality.
So that should answer your question as to how civil unions contribute to marriage equality. But I must say, this explanation is really, really basic. We've been at this decades.
Have you read this:
http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/05/18/3...

Please read this and then let's discuss okay......this article has just really ticked me off!!!

“The Buybull is innerrrent.”

Since: Jun 08

Silver Spring, MD

#11 May 19, 2011
I didn't actually read that exact link, but I gather the civil unions compromise is worse than I realized.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#12 May 19, 2011
writewingproxycontin wrote:
I didn't actually read that exact link, but I gather the civil unions compromise is worse than I realized.
Is there another link.......the Turtlebox one is okay, but I would like more information if you have it:-)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Cranston Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Kugel Mesh Settlements (Jul '11) Jun 22 South County 791
House of Hope Leaves Homeless Stranded Jun 19 Former res 2
Colwell family Lincoln Ave (Feb '11) Jun 19 Nan 9
Furniture Depot RI Owner Mukesh Tandon Sells R... Jun 17 furniture depot 1
Review: I Love Kickboxing Cranston (Jun '14) Jun 13 mariac 46
Doris Conklin Sect 8 Apt Arrested Mftg Selling... Jun 6 sect 8 apt drug d... 7
News Denied licenses, immigrants plan march across R... Jun 2 Cordwainer Trout 6
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Cranston Mortgages