Sunday, March 18, 2007

Marriage Equality in Rhode Island

I've been reading a new blog, 'MERI" (Marriage Equality Rhode Island). It's well-written and informative. This is yet another year that the Lege is being encouraged to pass a resolution awarding equality of marriage to gay/lesbians. To illustrate their point they have come with a lege package of bills giving them basic domestic rights which they now lack. There is concern that if that can't get the whole enchilada, trying for bites ain't bad either. They are also hopeful that it will illustrate what they are fighting for - not just one item.

It's funny but two years ago the question I was most often asked concerned abotion. Not so this last time. The question I was frequently asked (and not previously) was whether or not I supported gay marriige. I was rather surprised and I do.

I am a progressive Democrat. I favor the expansion of civil rights, rather than any exclusionary policies. Marriage is used to describe both a religious and civil state. In order to get married, you need a license awarded by the state. I do not want the state making decision of who may or may not marry based on gender, color, or other such qualifications other than both being consenting adults. It didn't work that well in Nazi Germany and it's a slippery slope that government has no business being involved in. Churches and religion can do what they want regarding their beliefs and practices. But not the state.

In fact at the Youth Summit this summer, this was the topic which they were most unified on - gay marraige. They consider it a duh! question which older generations have not yet come up to speed on.

So here is the lege package:

1. Testimonial Privilege – would provide domestic partners with the same privileges as spouses to not testify against one another in court.
2. Family Medical Leave – would allow domestic partners the same rights as married couples to take unpaid leave to care for one another – or a partner’s parents or child – in cases of serious illness.
3. Funeral Planning – would consider domestic partners as next of kin for the purposes of making funeral arrangements and decisions about a deceased partner’s remains.
4. Nursing Home Visitation – would allow domestic partners the same rights to private visitation as married couples, and would allow domestic partners who live in the same nursing home to share a room.
5. Pension Transfer – would allow state employees to name a domestic partner as a beneficiary of a state pension after their death.
6. Wrongful Death – would allow domestic partners to have standing to sue for loss of consortium in cases of wrongful death.

I see that Rep. Crowley & Jackson have a bill for civil unions. Will any of these pass? Hard to saw right now. Unless someone in leadership backs one of these, I doubt that you'll see anything. You need to see some prominent Democrats jumping on the bandwagon. For them to do this they need pressure by other Dem. lege members (and they need voters pressuring them). Right now I ain't hearing it (hearings on the civil union bill start thing week). I tend to think that Crowley & Jackson's bill has a better chance of passage but it may not be this year.

Does gay marriage bother me? Not in the slightest. I'm surprised anyone even bothers getting married anymore with divorce rates at 50%. "What the world needs now, is love sweet love." Stay tuned for more.

7 comments:

Unknown said...

I'm glad to see that Rhode Island is starting to (somewhat more seriously) consider legislation such as this.

I grew up in Rhode Island's twelfth (and, in high school, worked for the sleazy-even-then Bruce Long) although I now live in Massachusetts. My partner of nearly nine years and I were just married--legally--here in Massachusetts this Saturday. We don't love everything about Massachusetts, but we do love that it's the one state in the country that recognizes our relationship as the equal of everyone else's.

Also, as an aside to you, Eileen: When I was a kid, you were my librarian (although I can't remember where exactly, but I want to say elementary school) and I also went to school and worked (at the mansions) with your son, who was a couple of years younger. Small world I suppose, and it's great to see a true progressive finding a voice in Newport County.

Anonymous said...

Jason, I'm so happy for you. Everyone deserves a life-partner. Congratulations to both of you.

My son enjoyed working that summer. After that, he was obsolete as it's all automated. Too bad!

Others have told me that working for Brucie was sleazy but no one has said why.
spookys6@aol.com

Anonymous said...

Hi Eileen -

Thanks for the kudos on both the blog and the issue. Rhode Island's 12th district certainly supports equal marriage at the State House - Sen. Gibbs and Rep. Rice are both marriage sponsors.
If anyone else wants to check out the MERI blog you can go to www.marriageequalityri.org/blog.

Keep up the good work!

Anonymous said...

Hi Eileen -

Thanks for the kudos on both the blog and the issue. Rhode Island's 12th district certainly supports equal marriage at the State House - Sen. Gibbs and Rep. Rice are both marriage sponsors.
If anyone else wants to check out the MERI blog you can go to www.marriageequalityri.org/blog.

Keep up the good work!

Anonymous said...

I placed your blog on the sidebar, Jenn.

I generally try not to mention Sen. Gibbs in a good way if I can avoid it (sorry, that's just me). Now Rep. Rice is a different matter. For yrs. we had absolutely no road work done here. She's elected & voila! We even get extra.

While I appreciate that some organ. (who shall remain nameless) seek out her endorsement so that they can back up their claim of being non-partisan, it is a double-edged sword.

She is tolerated by her own Party as she is female & a senior. On some matters she can take an anti-party stance when there is no hope of a bill passing or when her bill comes out of committee. But if push came to shove on this bill, things would change, I believe. Until you can convince some Sen./Rep. who are tied in with leadership to support you,it just won't work. And could work against you. But, what do I know?

What do you think of Crowley/Jacksons' bill?

Anonymous said...

Just offering my non-partisan organizational statement that Sen. Gibbs is right on marriage - the other stuff I leave to those of you who live in the district!

Now, the Crowley/Jackson bill is another matter. First, civil unions are problematic because they institutionalize second-class citizenship for same-sex couples. And as Rhode Islanders currently have the right to marry in Massachusetts, and those marriages are being respected here at home, we think that civil unions would be a step backwards. After all, if they are truly the same as marriage, then what's the purpose of not calling them "marriage", except to discriminate?

Secondly, this particular bill would also define marriage as between one man and one woman - something that we are absolutely, positively opposed to - can I say that any more strongly? Such a clause is unneccesary, and would further the discriminatory impact of the civil unions themselves. While I appreciate Rep. Crowley's intent to provide legal protections to some of his constituents - and have had a few long conversations with him about it - I simply can't get behind this bill. We do hope that Reps Crowley and Jackson will sign on to our platform, and come to see how important marriage equality is.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for all the info.

The good part about my blog (and no employer)is that I can say whatever pleases me - ain't life grand!

I hope that it's your year.