- Stay Connected
Connect With Us
Rhode Island’s Legislative Committee Passes Civil Unions Bill
05/17/11-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
“It’s a trap!” the National Organization for Marriage’s guy in Rhode Island did not quite state, but that is what he sounded like after the proposed legislation to grant Rhode Island’s lesbian and gay population separate-but-not-really-equal rights with civil unions passed the House Judiciary Committee by a 9 to 3 vote today. Civil unions are suppose to grant the exact same rights to lesbians and gays in the state, but socially they will never be the same and will be forever seen as inferior.
Of course, Christopher Plante, of the Rhode Island chapter of the National Organization [to destroy] Marriage had this to say “The civil unions bill is bad. The bill itself has no protections for religious liberties whatsoever in it. The bill itself has no definition of defense of marriage. Supporters are saying this is a compromise between same-sex marriage and those of us who believe marriage is one man and one woman. In fact, what it is, is a Trojan horse. It’s an invitation for the courts of Rhode Island to redefine marriage without a vote of the people.”
Of course, we are still waiting for the invitation to vote on his rights.
Kate Brock of Ocean State Action saw it differently saying “I think it’s really important that we recognize that separate will never be equal … Setting up a separate institution does not help gay and lesbian couples. We will not stop fighting for marriage equality until we win it. This does not end the fight.”
The House is to vote on the measure this Thursday, and it is expected that marriage equality supporters will try to amend the bill so that they can enact same-sex marriage in that state.
Related articles
- RI: Civil Union Bill Faces First Vote (lezgetreal.com)
One Response to Rhode Island’s Legislative Committee Passes Civil Unions Bill
Leave a Reply
Socialize
For A Gay Friendly Get Away
blog advertising is good for you
Now Trending
Mexican Government Arrest Drug Cartel Leader "El Loco"
And Maxim's Number 69 On The Hot 100 Women Is. . .Stephen Colbert?
Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Jobs In America
Lesbian Mother Says That Worley's Sermon Par for the Course
NOM's Starbucks Boycott Gets The Face Of A Child Abuser
NC Pastor Wants To Put Lesbians, Gays In A Huge Ghetto And Kill Them
Miley Cyrus Goes TMI Discussing Sex Ed
Let's Talk About Lesbian Bed Death
Vermont Bi-National Lesbian Couple Will Not Be Separated
Tunisia To Extradite Qaddafi’s Prime Minister To Libya
In Shock
May 17, 2011 at 11:27 pm
I’ll be blunt about this right now. I don’t care one bit about these “religious” protections where civil unions are concerned. The biggest BS I have seen yet is that the anti-gay, whining like children about marriage equality itself, proceed to show less animosity toward civil unions BECAUSE they are different — and yet they proceed, then, to treat civil unions as if they are EXACTLY the same as marriage, even though if they were, they anti-gay would be screeching and screeching about their passage.
The whole POINT is that these civil unions are NOT marriage, and everyone, both sides, everyone involved, is clearly acknowledging that. History is now showing us again and again that where civil unions are enacted, the anti-gay are NOT complaining so vociferously.
Yet they want “religious” protections from CIVIL UNIONS? What is with their unthinking, senseless, emotionally crippled hysteria all of the time? I don’t care if they sit down and cry their eyes out; they cannot have it both ways. The legislatures in any of these states are a laughingstock to consider “religious” protections for a union that IS NOT marriage, according to EVERYONE pro-gay AS WELL AS anti-gay, and that is being OK’d for the very reason, and due to the very fact, that it is NOT marriage in any way whatsoever.
If I were a controlling presence in any of these legislatures, the very compromise I would insist on — come enactment of the legislation, or its death on the statehouse floor — would be that NO “religious” protections be enacted whatsoever, should civil unions be passed. I am sure the pro-gay would not like me very much for this, because I would insist on it to the point of being vociferous and obstructionist — for the reasons I have clearly and unequivocally outlined herein. I find it 100% unacceptable that the anti-gay are this non compos mentis that they are trying to have it both ways, and can no longer make any sense of their motives except by falling back upon the ONLY explanation that makes sense: They are, yes indeed, as bigoted, prejudiced and seething with hatred as the pro-gay continually and endlessly describe them to be. So soon as I plug this reality into the equation, everything makes sense: Pure hatred drives these unendingly stubborn liars, and nothing more. Simple.