Colorado Senate Passes Civil Unions Bill (Without the Religious Giveaways)

[JockBoy87]

Colorado Republicans last year shot down a civil unions bill laden with generous religious exemptions, including adoption discrimination. Unfortunate for them, because the exemption-laden bill looked ready for passage in the House. Well, instead of allowing a debate and vote in 2012, House Republicans contemptuously shut down the chamber, killing 30 other pieces of important legislation in the process. Not without great cost to the state, a special session was later required to carry on the state's critical unfinished business.

Now that the General Assembly is firmly controlled by Democrats, discriminatory exemptions are unnecessary to gain passage. While Republicans tried helplessly to amend exemptions this time, the new bill careened through the Senate without them.

The tally was 21-14, and smooth passage is expected in the House. The rest is history after Governor Hickenlooper signs it.

[rareboy]

yay for the good guys and our side!!!!!!!

[Just_Believe18]

Colorado, welcome to progressivism and social justice!

[tigerfan482]

Love it. Isn't it great when hatred and discrimination backfire?

[Ninja108]

It's not gay marriage but it's a start. And good riddance to the Religious Reich.

[JockBoy87]

It's not gay marriage but it's a start. And good riddance to the Religious Reich.

True, but this is as good as it gets in light of Colorado's constitutional amendment.

Fortunately, Colorado is an initiative state that requires relatively few signatures, so we should see a petition circulate in the not too distant future to repeal the state's ban, maybe as early as 2016.

[JockBoy87]

House Judiciary Committee hearing and vote is on Thursday, February 28.

[JockBoy87]

The committee voted 8-3 to advance the Senate Bill.

The vote included one Republican, Carole Murray.

http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLI...e?openFrameset

The bill now advances to the House Finance Committee. Two committee assignments is unusual, and last year Republicans made the bill pass through four, actually passing the first three of them, only to die by being referred to fourth, as was probably intended.

If the process is like last year, it will have to be approved by the Appropriations Committee too. This must be the Colorado way of doing things...

[JockBoy87]

Last committee vote 9-4 sends the bill to the House floor.

http://www.advocate.com/politics/mar...ed-house-floor

Passage will make Colorado the 18th state to allow access to comprehensive partnership rights in some form, and the 6th "civil union" state.

[Ninja108]

Seperate but unequal stinks but it's better then nothing.
And when will they start taxing the churches?!

[T-Rexx]

YAY! Now we can get a seat at the back of the bus!

[JockBoy87]

Watch the live debate.

http://www.coloradochannel.net/color...slative-day-62

Now the Republicans want to compromise. Go to Hell, you had your chance last year.

[JockBoy87]

The House passed the Senate Bill 11 by a voice vote making Colorado the 18th state to provide equal benefits to same sex couples. None of the anti-gay or discriminatory amendments to the bill passed.

Because it was a voice vote, there is no record of who was with us It would have been helpful to know, going forward with marriage equality in the future, which Republicans would most likely support it.

One outspoken opponent, Republican Bob Gardner, spoke about his ambivalence towards the bill because of its inevitability in light of American history... You don't say...

O well, the bill will be law when Gov. Hickenlooper signs it

We should all pause and reflect that we have achieved equal benefits for gay couples in 18 states, and 39% country's population. This is a huge achievement for the gay community that I think is not appreciated enough.

[JockBoy87]

It appears that the House must pass the Senate bill in a third and final vote, but with a number of Republicans in favor, passage is assured this week.

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/03/1...olorado-house/

[Sausy]

While civil unions aren't perfect every positive step taken towards equality is something worth our support. We've a long way to go but have come a whole lot farther than most of us could have imagined. Politics is the art of accomplishing the possible, not the ideal. Jockboy's perspective is spot on.

[Rolyo85]

I'm sure it's not a small thing for Coloradans, but ultimately, in 2013 it's no longer a "win" when we are talking about recognizing officially our relationships. Civil unions were always a half-measure, a band aid on the wound of marriage inequality. Today, with so many wins for real marriage, civil unions just feel "meh".

[JockBoy87]

I'm sure it's not a small thing for Coloradans, but ultimately, in 2013 it's no longer a "win" when we are talking about recognizing officially our relationships. Civil unions were always a half-measure, a band aid on the wound of marriage inequality. Today, with so many wins for real marriage, civil unions just feel "meh".

It was a dream once that we could even get to the point where civil unions are obsolete and unwanted.

I think it is likely that Coloradans will get to vote to repeal Amendment 43 by the next presidential election. Either the legislature or a citizen initiative can put the repeal to a vote. The support is there, and has been there for some time. Actually, I think it should have been on the ballot in November.

Republicans acknowledged two very interesting things in the floor debate, that one, this change is probably inevitable because of history, and two, that civil unions cannot be equal because of federal law. When DOMA is struck down, and every indication says the Supreme Court will do so in June, that fact will be made very clear, and marriage will get even more serious consideration.

[JockBoy87]

The roll call came to 39-26, which means two Republicans, Cheri Gerou and Carole Murray.

[Sausy]

Sad that Republicans still overall have tremendous resistance to basic equality and fairness but glad two at least are on the right side of history.

[JockBoy87]

Sad that Republicans still overall have tremendous resistance to basic equality and fairness but glad two at least are on the right side of history.

There probably would have been more if the religious conscience provisions had passed, but that would have meant infringing on the anti-discrimination law passed in 2007 for votes we did not need.

[Rolyo85]

The bill passed. It's now headed for the governor's desk.

[Sausy]

There probably would have been more if the religious conscience provisions had passed, but that would have meant infringing on the anti-discrimination law passed in 2007 for votes we did not need.

The problem with the religious conscience provisions is how in the name of faith the right to discriminate gets codified.... thankfully we didn't need to water down our rights to win a few squeamish bigots over.

[JockBoy87]

The problem with the religious conscience provisions is how in the name of faith the right to discriminate gets codified.... thankfully we didn't need to water down our rights to win a few squeamish bigots over.

It's a farce meant to justify descrimination. "Religious freedom" is the "states' rights" argument rebranded. Rep. Salazar even called it Jim Crow in the house floor.

[Sausy]

It's a farce meant to justify descrimination. "Religious freedom" is the "states' rights" argument rebranded. Rep. Salazar even called it Jim Crow in the house floor.

Very true. It's like "you can have your rights, but I don't have to accept them because it goes against my moral code", in essence makes the law meaningless which is of course the bigots aim.

[JockBoy87]

There is reason to believe the last two years in Colorado will serve as a future example for Republicans who deeply care about religious conscience exemptions. When you take control of a traditionally blue state, that is your best shot to get the most conservative version of the bill. I also think the inevitability aspect is starting to sink in judging from some of the Republican speeches.

It was almost sad the way the GOP tried to get amendments passed, the same ones that were in the bill they killed last year, so pathetic. The speaker just had to call a vote last year and it would have been law.

[Sausy]

I was reading on online article about what constituencies still were most hostile to marriage equality, and though of course religious conservatives and poorer whites were highly in opposition interestingly the most hostile were those who were identified with the Tea Party. Nearly 100% opposition... so called " small government" principles my ass!

That there was that realization of inevitability makes it so pathetic how they looked so transparent with those amendments. In that article it also was mentioned 12-13 states additionally could enact legislation recognizing civil unions and full on marriage within the next year so hopefully we'll have a lot more good news before long regarding the move towards equality.

[JockBoy87]

I was reading on online article about what constituencies still were most hostile to marriage equality, and though of course religious conservatives and poorer whites were highly in opposition interestingly the most hostile were those who were identified with the Tea Party. Nearly 100% opposition... so called " small government" principles my ass!

That there was that realization of inevitability makes it so pathetic how they looked so transparent with those amendments. In that article it also was mentioned 12-13 states additionally could enact legislation recognizing civil unions and full on marriage within the next year so hopefully we'll have a lot more good news before long regarding the move towards equality.

We will have lots of good news for gay couples across America for many years to come. I don't think anyone can say which states and when, but Ned Flaherty mentioned a lot of the likely ones. Once the Supreme Court enters a decision, we will have a better idea. I would agree that a dozen states are possible in the next few years regardless.

[JockBoy87]

The bill has been signed and is officially law.

Coloradans, I know G-Lex is from Denver, if you need the rights of civil unions for your relationship, you can apply on May 1.

[Rolyo85]

Congratulations. A step forward

[72-Jay]

The bill has been signed and is officially law.

Coloradans, I know G-Lex is from Denver, if you need the rights of civil unions for your relationship, you can apply on May 1.

Yep.. signed into law today
If I had had today off ..I woulda deffinitely considered going down into Denver to attend the signing event

[Ninja108]

It should also be noted that when this bill was killed last year,two of the Republicians who voted against it had gay sons. One of them made it a point to have it be known his gay son didn't matter one bit in his vote,he was representing his voters blah blah blah.
The other one had her son outed in the public eye by accident by someone who was giving her kudos for voting against the bill and keeping her son a second class citizen.
Tried to use that when faced when a primary threat on how anti-gay she was and got primaried anyway. She spat in the face of her son for a party that got rid of her anyway.
And finally,this should put to rest the argument that the "family values" groups and others would be fine with civil unions since it isn't called marriage.
They don't want us to be acknowledged at all,period.

[CoolBlue71]

Update:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...es-up-pen-sign

[72-Jay]

^Just a bit ago I read that article in today's paper

[Ninja108]

IMO,gay marriage will happen in Colorado down the road. The times are changing

[JockBoy87]

IMO,gay marriage will happen in Colorado down the road. The times are changing

They passed their amendment in 2006 by a relatively small margin, 55-45.

If the Supreme Court does not mandate it, or even if it does, there probably will be petitions circulating for repeal soon.

[72-Jay]

there probably will be petitions circulating for repeal soon.

There was talk of doing that as early as next year...

[72-Jay]

The bill takes effect tonight (at 12:01 am wednesday)

Denver & Boulder will have offices open at midnight (til 3am & 2am) to begin issuing licenses to eager couples.
Officials be on hand to perform civil union ceremonies.
In Denver 'One Colorado' is hosting a midnight celebration
In Boulder 'Out Boulder' is hosting a celebration beginning at 11:30pm

---
Congrats to anyone who is getting Civil Union'ed (not sure if thats the correct way to say it?)

[Ninja108]

Civil unions will do for now but seperate but equal isn't.

[ChickenGuy]

YAY! Now we can get a seat at the back of the bus!

Civil unions will do for now but seperate but equal isn't.

More of the usual bullshit fiction about civil unions. It has just NOTHING to do with 'getting to the back of the bus' T-Rexx and (gasp) Ninja108 you might yet realise that some gays WANT separate but equal, some gays PREFER seperate but equal, and I for one am one of them. Stop living in your ideological goldfish bowl and stop regurgitating your spoon-fed catchphrases.

I get really sick to death of the gay community intentionally sabotaging and alienating the progress of their own rights by slandering and insulting ANYONE who does not 100% agree with the POLITICAL left-wing inspired marriage mania obsession in the United States. Spout your website inspired talking points all you wish, but don't claim you speak for everyone, and don't insult both gays and African-Americans by making ridiculously inaccurate comparisons with the 1960's black civil rights movement.

[White Eagle]

Hopefully the Dem takeover of their Congress is an example of what the GOP can expect next election.

[eastofeden]

^^^I have no desire to embrace the oppressive institution of marriage. I don't want any part of it personally...

...but the fact remains that marriage is a legal institution and equality under the law is essential....for everyone. Simple.

(PS...Gay Marriage is not necessarily a "left wing" obsession. Equality under the law for everyone *is*)

[Ninja108]

More of the usual bullshit fiction about civil unions. It has just NOTHING to do with 'getting to the back of the bus' T-Rexx and (gasp) Ninja108 you might yet realise that some gays WANT separate but equal, some gays PREFER seperate but equal, and I for one am one of them. Stop living in your ideological goldfish bowl and stop regurgitating your spoon-fed catchphrases.

I get really sick to death of the gay community intentionally sabotaging and alienating the progress of their own rights by slandering and insulting ANYONE who does not 100% agree with the POLITICAL left-wing inspired marriage mania obsession in the United States. Spout your website inspired talking points all you wish, but don't claim you speak for everyone, and don't insult both gays and African-Americans by making ridiculously inaccurate comparisons with the 1960's black civil rights movement.

You have the right to your option. Just DON'T lecture me about how I live in a goldfish bowl and how we are hurting ourselves by not being content with civil unions which DON'T have all the rights of marriage and WON'T be acknowledged at the federal level even if DOMA is struck down.
As for "insulting" the movement,gays and lesbians have also been murdered,targeted for discrimination when it comes to work,housing etc so yes,it is part of the civil rights movement.

[rareboy]

Well as a Canadian living in a country with all the rights of marriage...we're very happy with it, thank you all very much.

Civil unions are perceived as a second class solution. Pure and simple. If people are satisfied with this, great. But we shouldn't have to be.

[ChickenGuy]

(PS...Gay Marriage is not necessarily a "left wing" obsession. Equality under the law for everyone *is*)

The polarised world of political 'debate' in America has MADE it a left-wing obsession, by expecting and assuming that either 100% or 0% of your party membership (depending on your affiliation) is for and against the issue. That's when a pro-marriage Republican isn't tolerated by party or voter AND when an anti-marriage Democrat isn't tolerated by party or voter. And that's when the issue starts becoming MORE ABOUT POLITICS than civil rights.

You have the right to your option. Just DON'T lecture me about how I live in a goldfish bowl and how we are hurting ourselves by not being content with civil unions which DON'T have all the rights of marriage and WON'T be acknowledged at the federal level even if DOMA is struck down.

It's not a matter of 'not being content' - it's the castigation and dismissing and effective stigmatising of anyone who prefers civil unions over marriage. It is ALSO the refusal to even consider the possibility of a debate on the issue OR that both systems (as I've previously suggested) could operate in tandem and be open and available for both straight and gay.

Instead, it's always back to the stupid and simplistic one-liner catchphrases like 'back of the bus' and 'seperate but equal' as if nothing more ever needed to be said about the issue. Dumbing the whole issue down to that moronic level of 'discussion' is what angers me.

Civil unions are perceived as a second class solution.

Thankyou for making my point. That perception has been fostered and perpetrated by the media, websites, news outlets, all obviously on the polarised far left (see my reply to eastofeden). And it is a false perception. Why is it peddled? My guess is because any 'middle ground' is claimed by them to be out of the question and tantamount to Nazi sympathisers and black pro-segregationists. (more political emotive rhetoric). Why is any middle ground so despised? Because the furtherly ideological both sides become, the more intolerant they are of beliefs and opinions other than their own.

Meh. I guess CE&P is hardly the best place to be expecting agreement from people about the inherent flaws of overly politically-driven thought.

[Ninja108]

When the federal government treats civil unions the same as marriage,then we'll talk. But since they don't,and still won't when DOMA is struck down,it's a seperate and not equal carrot.