Colorado Gov. Signs Designated Benefi...

Colorado Gov. Signs Designated Beneficiary Law

There are 24 comments on the www.advocate.com story from Apr 10, 2009, titled Colorado Gov. Signs Designated Beneficiary Law. In it, www.advocate.com reports that:

Gov. Bill Ritter of Colorado on Thursday signed the Designated Beneficiary Agreement Act, which allows unmarried adult couples -- including same-sex partners -- some of the legal rights afforded to married couples; the legislation delivers expanded rights in areas including inheritance matters, medical decisions, and hospital visitation. With an eye toward convenience, the law permits any two unmarried adults to designate each other as beneficiaries by filing a form with a county clerk. The legislation takes effect on July 1.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.advocate.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#1 Apr 10, 2009
It's not marriage, but it's not to be minimized, either. This is a step in the right direction.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#2 Apr 10, 2009
Certainly a step in the right direction!

“Sotomayor TheNewFace of Racism”

Since: Apr 09

Asheboro, NC

#3 Apr 10, 2009
The republicans should have supported this bill. It is a very conservative position to give individuals the freedom to choice their own family. So that goes to show that neo cons are not conservative but theocrats looking to control peoples lives.
Resist Ignorance

United States

#4 Apr 10, 2009
censoredagain wrote:
The republicans should have supported this bill. It is a very conservative position to give individuals the freedom to choice their own family. So that goes to show that neo cons are not conservative but theocrats looking to control peoples lives.
I agree. This just proves that they are not interested in "Family Values" after all.

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

#5 Apr 10, 2009
Oh, gee thanks... a Designated Beneficiary. That's really nice. %|

Daniel P from Long Island

“Protestant, Gay, Libertarian”

Since: Apr 08

Long Island, NY

#6 Apr 10, 2009
Second class citizens once again. Step to the back of the bus.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#7 Apr 10, 2009
While this legislation guarantees a minimum of rights that didn't exists before, it shouldn't necessarily be seen as a step in the right direction; as it puts same sex committed relationships on par with roommates and further entrenches our second class status. More crumbs from the table that we're now going to be expected to be grateful for and satisfied with...

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#8 Apr 10, 2009
Rick in Kansas wrote:
While this legislation guarantees a minimum of rights that didn't exists before, it shouldn't necessarily be seen as a step in the right direction; as it puts same sex committed relationships on par with roommates and further entrenches our second class status. More crumbs from the table that we're now going to be expected to be grateful for and satisfied with...
You go too far with the "roommates" analogy. This requires a reciprocal commitment to care for one another--even after death. I have never had such a commitment to any of my roommates. Any of us could (and did) move on at any time with little disruption to the others' lives.

But it does put us on par with the two spinster sisters who care for one another like, well, sisters. Or two widows who share a house, home, and old age together--not because they're lesbians--because they honor their previous marriages and need each others' help.

A good libertarian would definitely approve of such choices. I used to think that libertarian values were closely associated with conservative values. Lately, however, the latter have been hijacked, as is illustrated in this vote.

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

#9 Apr 11, 2009
Rick in Kansas wrote:
While this legislation guarantees a minimum of rights that didn't exists before, it shouldn't necessarily be seen as a step in the right direction; as it puts same sex committed relationships on par with roommates and further entrenches our second class status. More crumbs from the table that we're now going to be expected to be grateful for and satisfied with...
Exacly my thoughts... not marriage, not a civil union, something even less than... definatly not a step in the right direction.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#10 Apr 11, 2009
Daniel P from Long Island wrote:
Second class citizens once again. Step to the back of the bus.
It's "Foot in the door", and that's big.

Next, it will be both feet, an arm, and them LOOK OUT, we'll walk right on through in every state.

That's why the neo-cons were so afraid of this, and other small gains like this.

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

#11 Apr 11, 2009
Hmmmm. Some people want it ALL right NOW! Not going to happen over night. Good grief! This country has come a long way since Nov.4th. Most of what has happended would NOT have happened if McCain and a Rep. admistration was in there.
born that way

Washington, DC

#12 Apr 11, 2009
So I'm traveling out of state with my "designee" and one of us is hospitalized. Guess I just tell the hospital to call the county clerk back in Colorado for my authorization to visit and make health decisions...

Is that the way this works?

“I will not go quietly.”

Since: Feb 07

Indianapolis Indiana

#13 Apr 11, 2009
Not enough information given at all.
So, how does it affect the taxes on inherited property? Are they eliminated or reduced as they are for a married couple?
Did earlier laws forbid same-sex couples from making similar provisions within a Will, power of attorney, medical PoA?
Does this law bear the same legal force as those laws which recognize Marriage rights?
It doesn't sound all that spectacular to me without more information and honestly including little legislative tidbits like that may indeed be used just as the 'Domestic partnership' laws were used in CA to rationalize denying full fledged marital rights to same-sex couples so you'll pardon me if I pass on breaking out the Champagne just yet.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#14 Apr 11, 2009
Josh in New Orleans wrote:
<quoted text>
Exacly my thoughts... not marriage, not a civil union, something even less than... definatly not a step in the right direction.
Better than trying to get something less than a civil union passed and even THAT not passing.

Since: Apr 07

Palmyra, PA

#15 Apr 11, 2009
censoredagain wrote:
The republicans should have supported this bill. It is a very conservative position to give individuals the freedom to choice their own family. So that goes to show that neo cons are not conservative but theocrats looking to control peoples lives.
Oh, they're obsessed. Oh, they're obsessed. They are like *mental patients*(I was just saying this in another thread) in their seething, vomiting, spewing *hatred* of anything which they feel threatens a "familial core" that they attempt ceaselessly, ceaselessly to *force* down the throats of other people. What a sickening "laugh" that it's *ANYONE* pro-gay who is forcing anything upon anyone; it is these obsessed, sick individuals who are *almost literal mental patients* about their endless, sick, anti-religious and anti-christian selfishness.

It's so unconscionable that (as I've been saying for some time now) I have come to associate *religion itself with evil*. This is not to say that I don't appreciate many religious people who follow precepts of love, compassion, and so forth; I'll be the first to want to identify their virtue and their nobility. But now, it's got to be *proven* to me; upon *first* hearing that anyone is religious, I think, "Ahhh, in other words, selfish and evil." But I am very open to *seeing* that they are not that way,*if* I see it in their behavior.

Since: Apr 07

Palmyra, PA

#16 Apr 11, 2009
And I do see both sides on this one.

It really is the equivalent of telling the slave, "You can eat directly outside the mansion next to the dogs, rather than sitting way out in your shack in the field." I can absolutely see it in no other way than that.

HOWEVER, the "master" is still letting the slave eat directly outside the mansion rather than in his own shack.

I don't mean this post in a backhanded way, either; I'm *NOT ABOUT* to call this anything near equality, but it *IS* technically better than nothing, absolutely.

“That's Mama Luigi to you too”

Since: Jun 08

Orange County,CA

#17 Apr 12, 2009
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
Better than trying to get something less than a civil union passed and even THAT not passing.
Don't forget Referendum I allmost passed in '06 The No on I and Yes on 43 where the same.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#18 Apr 12, 2009
In some states you pass what CAN be passed and work for more in the future. I think ANY bill that address rights for same-sex couples, ESPECIALLY if it includes other types of relationships, can help advance gay rights in the future. Maybe this would be the spark that makes the old spinster sisters realize they do indeed have something in common with the gays and they may be supportive when civil unions or whatever does finally come up for a vote.

The biggest hinderance of the advancement of gay rights (besides religious zealotry) is that many people just plain don't believe they have anything at all in common with "the gays". That's the real reason we keep losing these votes on constitutional amendments in the states. The anti side is very polarized, as is the pro side. What we need to do is reach the people in the middle who just don't really care one way or the other. Those people either don't vote at all, or just skip that part of the ballot because they think it doesn't affect them.

Interesting statistics from the Prop 8 vote:

Total ballots cast- 13,743,177
Total votes on prop 8- 11,613,355

That means over 2 million people who voted did NOT vote on the Prop 8 measure at all. Prop 8 only passed by 523,431 votes.

Another 3 million registered voters did not come to the polls at all, and another 6 million eligible voters did not even register.

That's 11 million eligible votes in California who didn't vote on Prop 8. Since the total votes on Prop 8 were 11.5 million, almost 50% of eligible voters did not even vote on Prop 8.

Now granted, even if every single person in the state voted, the end result may have been the same- we'll never know for sure. But considering the fervor of the anti-gay side, I'm pretty sure that just about everyone that was definitely opposed to marriage equality came out to vote.

Sorry for the long post, but I just got around to crunching the numbers myself and even though I suspected as much, I never looked at the raw numbers before. I urge everybody to go to www.vote.sos.ca.gov and see for yourself.

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

#19 Apr 14, 2009
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
Better than trying to get something less than a civil union passed and even THAT not passing.
...or more like something to keep us apeased so the whole issue gets knocked down in priority.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#20 Apr 14, 2009
Josh in New Orleans wrote:
<quoted text>
...or more like something to keep us apeased so the whole issue gets knocked down in priority.
Do we all see what is happening in Nevada? They're going to get nothing because the Governor is going to veto a simple DP bill.

So I'll take what I can get at the moment in Colorado.

That all important first "foot in the door" is critical. Upgrading it later seems to be easier.

So if marriage would come in ten years, this temporary compromise might make it come in 7.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Thousands of people march during rally at Bosto... 11 min Shirvell s Shrivel 2,254
News Is Same-Sex Attraction a Sin? 25 min Shirvell s Shrivel 16
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 29 min Frankie Rizzo 43,018
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 1 hr Wish4549 4,736
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 1 hr Wish3287 22,551
News Mexican leftist senators defend battering Trump... 1 hr Shirvell s Shrivel 1
News Arkansas court upholds gay marriage birth certi... 1 hr Shirvell s Shrivel 1
News Trump's staff picks disappoint, alarm minority ... 2 hr Frankie Rizzo 277
More from around the web