Connecticut governor supports civil unions for gays

[davidinalameda]

http://www.advocate.com/new_news.asp?ID=15295&sd=03/03/05

Republican Connecticut governor M. Jodi Rell revealed Tuesday that she supports allowing gay and lesbian couples to enter into civil unions, putting an end to questions about where she stood on the issue. Her move added to the growing momentum behind a civil unions bill, which was approved last week by the legislature's judiciary committee. "I don't believe in discrimination of any sort, and I want people to have equal rights and equal opportunities," Rell said.

The bill would give gay and lesbian couples many of the same rights as married couples. The governor said she had not evaluated the legislation but offered her unqualified support for the concept for the first time. "The concept I don't have trouble with," Rell told reporters after a ceremony at the capitol for new judges.


but of course civil unions are discrimination--they don't give all the same benefits that marriage does

really wish someone would explain this to people who say civil unions are the only option

[GodlessBiker]

1. "I don't believe in discrimination of any sort.,

and I want people to have equal rights and equal opportunities," Rell said.

Fucking liar.

[Atman]

2. I posted this yesterday...

Gays or Gangs - It's about the label

[sui generis]

3. oh yeah, and we're going to "let" black people vote

except instead of calling it voting we're going to call it "civil approval" and it won't count as a full vote, because, well, you know . . . they're black!!!

I believe her heart is in the right place though; it just takes a bit more conviction to turn this into a moral leadership issue rather than a concession to everyone.

[davidinalameda]

4. why should she put herself out there

when so many Democrats refuse to support equal rights for gays and lesbians as well

[sui generis]

5. she should put herself out there because we vote too

I'm glad she IS putting herself out there, and I think that eventually she'll come around. There may have been a time when Gavin Newsom actually thought about civil unions versus marriage and came to reject the idea of civil unions as inadequate.

It is the one disappointment I found in Dean - I was at a private donor party thrown for him here in Dallas when he stated his views and I did not agree with him then either.

But it is a huge leap and a huge liability to a politician to clearly define "marriage" as a church issue and everything else as a civil property and income contract, rather than a moral or biblical issue.

Baby steps are better than no steps at all.

[davidinalameda]

6. you missed my point

or I just didn't make it clear enough

the Democratic Party has long taken the initiative on civil rights issues and they're letting this one slide under the table so to speak because people like Hillary Clinton and the other so-called party leaders think that being Repuke lite is the way to win elections

The Repukes have nothing to lose by supporting civil unions and everything to gain. They can portray themselves as pro-gay because they're taking the exact same stance as the Democrats

The Democrats are willing to compromise on gay rights and abortion rights to win elections. What are they willing to compromise on next--environmental regulations; work place standards, etc?