|
 |  Seattle Times -
Nov-06-2009Voters approve Referendum 71(topic overview)
CONTENTS:
- Gay partnership measure approved by voters By Rachel La Corte Washington voters have approved the state's new "everything but marriage" law, expanding rights for domestic partners and marking the first time any state's voters have approved a gay equality measure at the ballot box. (More...)
- The measure asked people to approve or reject the latest expansion of the new state law that Gov. Chris Gregoire signed in May granting same sex domestic partners all the rights of married couples. (More...)
- As for the marriage / domestic partner issue itself. (More...)
- The measure faces at least 60 percent rejection by voters in all four counties, with more than 70 percent of Grant County voters giving a thumbs-down to the referendum. (More...)
- Why do you have to change things? Marriage has been working just fine for over what. hundreds of years without having gays and lesbians having a say so. (More...)
- Washington's 'everything-but-marriage' measure joins similar ones in New Jersey, Oregon and California, where marriage was legal for five months last year until a ban amendment was passed. (More...)
- Currently, liberals enthralled by intimidation are trying to abolish secret ballots in unionization votes. (More...)
- The referendum addresses approval or rejection of a law already on the books, Senate Bill 5688, which was supposed to take effect July 26. (More...)
- Larry Stickney, a social conservative and president of the Washington Values Alliance, says disclosure of the identities of petition-signers will enable "ideological background checks" that will have a chilling effect on political participation. (More...)
- As of tonight, I've vowed that Sweetie and I will be spending our tourism dollars in states that support equal rights. (More...)
- Does that sound like a democracy to you? The alternative would have to be that we would take the word of whatever state official received the petitions, which could lead to all sorts of political skullduggery. (More...)
- Fyi. economically, there are same-sex couples out there who contribute more economically than some married folks. (More...)
SOURCES
FIND OUT MORE ON THIS SUBJECT
Gay partnership measure approved by voters By Rachel La Corte Washington voters have approved the state's new "everything but marriage" law, expanding rights for domestic partners and marking the first time any state's voters have approved a gay equality measure at the ballot box. [1] Five years ago, 1,028,546 Oregonians demoted gay and lesbian citizens, too, when voters carved discrimination into the Oregon Constitution. They voted for Measure 36, defining marriage as between a man and a woman. To the degree that Oregonians lost their balance in that election, the Oregon Legislature pulled the state back on track in 2007. It approved both anti-discrimination legislation and a strong domestic partnership law for gays and lesbians. Washington's Referendum 71 similarly grants such couples "everything but marriage." This week's probable victory in Washington for domestic partnerships will almost certainly be overshadowed by the defeat of marriage in Maine.[2] The Washington legislature first established domestic partnerships in 2007. Early this year Governor Chris Gregoire signed the so-called "everything but marriage" bill, which granted domestic partners even more benefits that had previously applied only to married couples, reports the Seattle Times. These benefits include the right to use sick leave to care for a partner and adoption, child custody and child support rights. In an attempt to overturn the law, opponents of gay rights successfully lobbied to add the referendum on the issue to this year's election.[3] Across eastern and southwest Washington, voters were overwhelmingly rejecting the measure. Opponents remained optimistic that they could close the gap, but warned that if the law was approved, gay marriage would be the next step. The expanded law would add benefits, such as the right to use sick leave to care for a domestic partner, and rights related to adoption, child custody and child support for same-sex partners and some senior couples.[4] With approximately 69% of the expected votes in, it seems that Washington state's "everything but marriage" law has been approved. Although this measure does not allow for same-sex couples to marry, it expands their rights as domestic partners.[5]
In a victory for proponents of expanded gay rights, Washington state voters have upheld the new "everything but marriage" law for same-sex domestic partners. Earlier this week Maine voters rejected that state's new gay marriage law.[6] Same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa and Vermont, and will start in New Hampshire in January. Voters in Maine on Tuesday repealed a gay marriage law that was passed by the Legislature there earlier this year. Gov. Chris Gregoire said that the vote on R-71 made her "very proud." "I think Washington state stood out in this country on Tuesday by saying one of the inherent values in our state is equality," she said Thursday. Results weren't known until Thursday because almost all voters in Washington cast their ballots by mail, and even those ballots postmarked on Election Day are valid. That means close elections often drag on for a few days or longer. Associated Press writer Curt Woodward contributed to this report from Olympia.[7] "Today is a great day of celebration for the tens of thousands of gay and lesbian families in Washington, and for anyone who supports equality in our state and around the country. "While it felt like a crushing blow this fall when R-71 received enough signatures to make the ballot, at the time I expressed my faith that Washington voters would uphold the progress the Legislature made for gay and lesbian couples when it passed the 'everything but marriage' bill earlier this year.[8]
In King County, where 'Approve' is winning by a two-to-one margin, fewer than half the ballots have been counted, and the campaign estimates that the ballots that remain to be counted in King County will account for over 30 percent of the votes remaining to be counted statewide. "Based on the results we saw tonight, we will be making history in moving forward toward full equality for gay and lesbian Washingtonians and their families," said Anne Levinson, Chair of the Approve 71 campaign. "Voters across the state listened to the personal stories of gay and lesbian families, and the challenges they face, and, based on the returns so far, they are sending a resounding message - we want to see all families treated equally under the law." "We believe the end result of this election will be a win not just for the couples and families, but for all Washingtonians who believe in values of fairness and equality," Levinson continued. "It was profoundly wrong for some to try to eliminate the rights of others."[9] Full-fledged gay marriage is still not allowed under Washington law. Gary Randall of Protect Marriage Washington, which opposed the law and pushed to get the referendum on the ballot, said they weren't ready to concede. "We're just going to wait and watch it play out," he said. Randall said that while they're waiting until all the votes are counted, "going in, we knew that we had a pretty tough task ahead of us." "We knew there was a chance we would not prevail," he said. Two national gay rights groups — the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and the Family Equality Council — say that voter approval of such a measure was a first.[7] We had only weeks between certification and the first ballots going out. If these trends continue, this will be only the sixth referendum approved in the history of our state," said Josh Friedes, Approve 71 Campaign Manager. "To have these kinds of numbers in an off-year election where those who vote tend to be older and more conservative is a real testament to the broad support for Washington's gay and lesbian families." Friedes and Levinson both noted that because of Referendum 71 - which Protect Marriage Washington, the Family Policy Institute, the National Organization for Marriage and others fought to force on the ballot - Washingtonians now have a greater understanding of the challenges faced by gay and lesbian families and the legal protections they lacked.[9] Washington state has a history of fighting to ensure everyone ''' mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters ''' enjoys equal rights. From the first bill I signed in 2007 to this new law, we have proudly made great strides on behalf of all Washington families. Thank you, governor, for your support of this important civil rights legislation, which wouldn't exist today without your signature. As of this evening, Referendum 71 has surpassed 52% of the vote, and is now passing more comfortably than it was on Election Night, partly thanks to King County's heavy support.[10] Today, Washington state residents will vote on Referendum 71 to expand the state's domestic-partnership law --a controversial issue in its own right because it involves gay couples.[11]
Voters in Washington state will decide today on a referendum that could effectively roll back legislation passed in May to extend domestic partnership rights and responsibilities to gay and lesbian couples similar to those granted married heterosexual couples.[12] SEATTLE - Washington voters today appear to be approving Referendum 71, upholding a state law that provides important legal protections for gays and lesbians and seniors in registered domestic partnerships.[9]
Referendum 71 expands a 2007 domestic partnership law for a second time, granting gay and lesbian couples all the remaining state-provided rights, benefits and responsibilities of marriage.[13] Washington's Referendum 71, a measure approving the expansion of benefits provided under the state's domestic partnership law, is projected to pass once all votes from Tuesday's election are counted.[3] Washington state voters have approved Referendum 71, keeping a law that expands state benefits for registered same-sex and some senior domestic partners.[14] "Our state made history today," said Anne Levinson, chairwoman of Washington Families Standing Together, which fought to keep the law on the books. "This is a day for which we can all look back with pride." The expanded law in Washington state adds benefits, such as the right to use sick leave to care for a domestic partner, and rights related to adoption, child custody and child support.[7]
In Washington, the pro-gay side kept a domestic partner law that conferred most of the state rights of marriage on unmarried, registered couples, beating back a strong challenge by just 2.2 percent of the vote.[15] Washington state, along with California, Oregon, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia, have laws that either recognize civil unions or domestic partnerships that afford same-sex couples similar rights to marriage.[7] A pro same-sex marriage banner graces the windows of a classroom in Piggott during the "Thinking Queerly" workshops held on campus. Statewide voting numbers were down this year after an estimated 28.24 percent of approximately three and a half million Washington State registered voters sent in their ballots. There were several highly anticipated state contests this year including Referendum 71--a referendum that will uphold legislation signed by Governor Christine Gregoire in 2007 affording same sex couples the same legal rights as their heterosexual counterparts.[16]
Did Sex Tape Lead to Prejean Settlement? By Kilian Melloy The purported existence of a graphic sex tape in which former Miss California Carried Prejean allegedly appears reportedly was the reason why Prejean settled with former employer Miss USA--for no money at all. Gay Rights Referendum Leads in Washington State By Kilian Melloy The final tally is not yet in, but gay and lesbian families in Washington state are expected to hold onto legal privileges that give them all the same state-level rights and protections of marriage--though not under that name.[1] "Were it not for the referendum, the law would have just quietly gone into effect in July. By forcing the referendum, those groups have likely done quite a lot to advance the cause of full equality for lesbian and gay families in Washington state," Levinson said.[9]
The Secretary of State's Office estimates another 500,000 to 600,000 ballots statewide are still outstanding, with about half expected from King County, where the measure is being approved by slightly more than 2 to 1. "Voters across the state listened to the personal stories of lesbian and gay families and the challenges they faced and sent a strong message that we want to see all families treated equally under the law in our state," said Anne Levinson, chairwoman of Washington Families Standing Together, which worked for the measure's approval.[14] Twelve years ago -- just a blink in historical terms -- Washington voters said "no" to an anti-discrimination law. This week, it appears, they've reorganized the universe of state laws to ensure gay and lesbian families have parallel protections. This is part of an evolution so breathtaking, in truth, it qualifies as a revolution.[2]
Yesterday, the voters of Washington came through. "In this state, voters will not allow a small group of right wing activist(s) to determine who should be treated equally. In this state, the majority believes that gay and lesbian families who work hard and play by the rules deserve to be treat fairly.[8]
We bemoan the fact that some groups want access to the information on petitions for harassment and intimidation purposes. This is the situation in Washington state where voters on Tuesday cast ballots on an initiative concerning gay marriage.[17] Opponents of Referendum 71 sued to get the state to disclose the names and addresses of the 138,000 people who signed the petition putting the measure on the ballot. They argued that the names should be disclosed under Washington's Public Records Act. It's clear why they want them. They seek to expose the signers to uncomfortable social confrontations, possibly with colleagues and neighbors. One group, Knowthyneighbor.org, has posted on the Web the names of those who signed similar petitions in other states including Florida and Massachusetts. The Washington case includes affidavits from people who said they've felt threatened for taking the position they did on the measure.[17] "Hot Topic: Battle Rages in Washington State over Privacy of Petition Signers" the subheader read.'' While the November 3 article itself by staffer Brian Montopoli was balanced -- giving room for a social conservative activist to defend keeping the names and addresses of signatories of the Referendum 71 petition from being made public -- the headline sets the tone for readers to see pro-traditional marriage backers in Washington State as folks motivated to deprive fellow citizens of their "rights."[12]
What is, however, unambiguously wrong is the attempt by some supporters of the law to force disclosure of the names and addresses of the 138,000 people who signed the petition bringing about the referendum. This can have no other purpose than to make it possible to harass those signers. Those favoring disclosure say it is mandatory under the state's Public Records Act.[18]
What makes you think that "marriage" these days lacks integrity or is somehow any different from marriage at any other time in our history? Do you honestly believe there was greater marriage integrity in the past? Better yet, if choosing to live together today is somehow a better choice than choosing to get married, then why don't we as a society do away with marriage all together? Hint: Because the majority of people still want to be married. That said, we'll see if this new law changes that statistic in our state going forward. If you can gain all of the benefits of marriage without having to get married, then what's the point? Let's just live together and have our cake and eat it too! Social mores are very much a function of state law, but very much like deer in the headlights, most people just don't see it coming until it's too late. I am keenly interested in seeing how this will effect private sector employers who must now consider additional benefits of all kinds for people who simply claim that their SO boyfriend/girlfriend, boyfriend/boyfriend or girlfriend/girlfriend must now be considered on the same legal level as a husband or wife. I think this is a sham and will surely cause all kinds of unanticipated social and economic issues--not the least of which will be higher costs passed on down to all consumers in the form of higher prices anywhere and everywhere for all goods and services. As a society we will now all pay for boyfriend/girlfriend, girlfriend/girlfriend and boyfriend/boyfriend claims on health insurance benefits and employee benefits of all kinds now being reflected in higher prices that we, the end-users, must now pay for all goods and services purchased in this state.[4] I oppose it on economic grounds for one. Apparently you seem to think that these newfound benefits will simply be pulled out of thin air? Who do you think will be paying for all of these newfound benefits? How can people be so incredibly uninformed? Where do you think the money to pay for R-71 benefits/entitlements will now come from???? Do you honestly believe that employers will pay for it all and that those big, greedy corporations need to share more of their profits with us little people??? Well, think again! WE THE LITTLE PEOPLE WILL NOW PAY MORE EVERY TIME WE PURCHASE ANY GOOD OR SERVICE RETAILED IN THIS STATE. ''[4]
The measure asked people to approve or reject the latest expansion of the new state law that Gov. Chris Gregoire signed in May granting same sex domestic partners all the rights of married couples. That same month conservative interests announced they would attempt to overturn the new law and enough signatures were collected enough to place R-71 on the November ballot. [6] The measure asked voters to approve or reject the latest expansion of the state's domestic partnership law, granting registered domestic partners additional state rights previously given only to married couples.[7] The legislature passed Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5688 concerning rights and responsibilities of state-registered domestic partners and voters have filed a sufficient referendum petition on this bill. This bill would expand the rights, responsibilities, and obligations accorded state-registered same-sex and senior domestic partners to be equivalent to those of married spouses, except that a domestic partnership is not a marriage.[12]
Voters in Chelan, Douglas, Okanogan and Grant counties handily rejected the referendum ''' nicknamed the '''everything but marriage''' measure ''' that would grant registered domestic partners additional state rights currently given only to married couples.[4] Though it was winning statewide, the state referendum to expand the rights of gay couples and senior domestic partners never got a foothold in North Central Washington.[4]
Governor Christine Gregoire had signed a law in 2007 enabling gay couples to acquire same status and equality in state as their counterparts. It was not implemented due to a high resistance and it was decided to take a referendum over this issue. This referendum took place yesterday and today, we have results of that which shows an approval of this law with a narrow margin of 51.10 % to 48.80 %. Anyways majority is authority, it has now become a law which will support same sex marriages in state and give them same rights in society as others have.[19] Referendum 71, which grants "everything but marriage" rights to gay and lesbian couples (going well beyond the scope of the 1997 anti-discrimination law that was blasted at the ballot box), was receiving slightly more than half the vote.[20] Approval of Referendum 71 would make Washington the first state to expand equal rights for gays and lesbians by popular vote.[2] At last count, Referendum 71 was leading with 52% of the vote. Although gays couples in Washington still cannot marry, this, at the very least, is a step in the right direction as far as equality is concerned.[5]
Erika Bailey, freshman international studies major was pleased with the election results, most specifically the likely approval of Referendum 71. "It puts our state in the right direction as far as equal rights," Bailey said. "This is a stepping stone toward gay marriage."[16] Gay equality laws in other states, ranging from civil rights to gay marriage, have either been implemented by the courts or legislative process.[7] Social conservatives, who say the law violates a 1998 gay marriage ban ruled constitutional by the state's Supreme Court, collected nearly 138,000 signatures to put the law up for a vote.[13]
The opposite, in fact -- dozens of states have voted overwhelmingly to outlaw gay marriage, domestic partnerships or even the ability to adopt kids. Those votes actively consigned gays and lesbians to second-class-citizen status.[20] As a 71 year old male member of a heterosexual couple who has chosen domestic partnership, I'm happy that this measure has passed. It will give my much younger female partner the rights that she would otherwise have to go through traditional marriage to get. For personal reasons, she has chosen to live with me for the rest of our natural lives, but doesn't want the blessing of the church, and I agree. For us this is a victory. I'm just as happy for the homosexual couples, as this is about family, whether gay or straight.[6] R-71, the measure upholding domestic partnership rights for gays, is ahead 51.13 to 48.87 percent.[21]
Voters in Washington State have approved a gay-inclusive domestic partnership law, the AP reported.[13] "Yesterday's vote was not about marriage and was never about marriage. That is a separate discussion that we intend to have with Washington voters ' a discussion similar to the one we've had over the past three years as we've made step-by-step progress through domestic partnerships.[8]
The original domestic partnership law, backed by Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, two years ago, provided inheritance rights in cases where there was no will, hospital visitation rights, the ability to authorize autopsies and organ donations.[6] Under state law, senior couples can register as domestic partnerships as well.[4]
Under state law, senior heterosexual couples can register as domestic partners as well, if at least one partner is 62 years old or older. That provision was included by lawmakers to help seniors who don't remarry out of fear they could lose certain pension or social security benefits.[7] More than 12,000 people in Washington state are registered as domestic partners, and most are gay.[7] "I was very concerned that if the voters had said no, it would have been a major setback for gay and lesbian families in Washington state."[7] "We are all harmed when any of us is treated differently under the law. We hope this puts an end to the divisive and mean spirited attacks by extremist groups against gay and lesbian Washingtonians and that we can all work together on the real problems confronting all families - gay and non-gay alike." The Approve 71 campaign was supported by a broad statewide coalition and received more than 500 endorsements, including faith-based groups and organizations representing communities of color, seniors, education, health care and public safety; clergy of many denominations; labor; large employers such as Microsoft, Google, Starbucks, Boeing; small businesses; civic groups, organizations that care for families, immigrant populations and children, who all took a stand in support of their friends, neighbors and co-workers. "This was one of the shortest statewide ballot campaigns in Washington.[9] A group called Protect Marriage Washington led the petition drive to get R-71 on the ballot. Gay rights organizations demanded to see the petitions with some of them promising to post signers' names and addresses on the internet.[11] Back issues available for $3 per issue (postage included). Return postage must accompany all manuscripts, drawings, and photographs submitted if they are to be returned, and no responsibility may be assumed for unsolicited materials. All rights to letters, art and photos sent to Nightspots (Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago Gay and Lesbian News and Feature Publication) will be treated as unconditionally assigned for publication purposes and as such, subject to editing and comment. The opinions expressed by the columnists, cartoonists, letter writers, and commentators are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of Nightspots (Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago Gay and Lesbian News and Feature Publication). The appearance of a name, image or photo of a person or group in Nightspots (Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago Gay and Lesbian News and Feature Publication) does not indicate the sexual orientation of such individuals or groups. While we encourage readers to support the advertisers who make this newspaper possible, Nightspots (Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago Gay and Lesbian News and Feature Publication) cannot accept responsibility for advertising claims.[9]
N.Y. Governor Calls Special Session to Tackle Marriage By Steve Weinstein At last, some good news: New York Gov. David Paterson is calling on a special session of the state's Legislature to tackle gay marriage. Sykes, Lopez bring new colors to late-night TV By Lynn Elber Openly lesbian Wanda Sykes is coming to Fox, while George Lopez is getting his own show on TBS. Scottish Pedophile, Former Gay Rights Activist, Sentenced By Kilian Melloy A Scottish man who betrayed his friends and preyed on their children has been sentenced, as has another Scot; the two men were described as the "ringleaders" in a pedophilia ring.[1] State supreme courts have expanded them, as California's did in 2008, ruling that equal protection under the state Constitution demanded that gays and lesbians be able to marry. The voice of the people of an entire state, when it has sounded before this week, has roared "no" to gay equality, most emphatically to the question of allowing same-sex marriage.[2] As usual, everyone jumps on the most controversial part of every subject. There is more to this bill than just same-sex marriage benefits. This is also about opposite-sex relationships, who choose not to get married. Many people get pregnant, intentionally or not, who are not married, or CHOOSE not to be married because of its lack of integrity these days. I have friends who are not married, and stay-at-home-moms, who are not covered under their significant other's insurance because of their choice. This is just as big of an issue as same-sex relationships--possibly even more important beause I would guess there are more unmarried, stay-at-home moms than unmarried, non-working gay or lesbian moms/dads.[4] Astonishing? After 12 years of liberal propaganda in the liberal newspapers and media a homo bill will be passed. Too many weak minded susceptible people follow the lead of the liberal media because they have no ethics or morals of their own. All people of color should be mad, outraged, and protesting the gays calling their cause a civil rights issue.[2]
Was the manager of a fashionable Los Angeles restaurant who contributed just $100. Charles Bouley, a gay columnist, has honorably protested such bullying. He says people "have the right to be wrong," and reminds gay activists: "Even Barack Obama said marriage was between a man and a woman at a time when we needed his voice on our side on equality. He let us down, too, remember, and many of you still gave him a job."[18] Bigotry loses! Finally! It took government to acknowledge that gays and lesbians are normal people who deserve the same rights as heterosexual people, but it will take the citizens to validate it over time. It will happen.[6]
In Kalamazoo, Michigan, voters approved adding LGBT people to the city's antidiscrimination ordinance. The measure included both sexual orientation and gender identity, adding those terms to the city's protections for employment, housing and public accommodations. It passed with 7,671 votes, compared to 4,731 against. 'This marks an important victory for Kalamazoo, where voters have affirmed that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are part of the fundamental social fabric of the city, which now joins nearly 20 other cities in Michigan that have enacted nondiscrimination ordinances,' said Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.[15] With more than 1 million votes counted Tuesday night, just over 51 percent had approved the measure. '''This is a remarkable statement by the voters of Washington,''' said Anne Levinson, chairwoman of Washington Families Standing Together, the group fighting to keep the law on the books. '''They have a history of being fair-minded and compassionate, and they'''ve proven that once again.'''[4] Voters in Maine faced a similar question Tuesday after social conservatives challenged a gay marriage law approved by lawmakers in the spring and put it up for a vote. Gay activists in Maine, however, lost their bid to keep the law.[13] If gay-marriage advocates win, it'll be the first time that voters anywhere in America will have voted to support gay marriage. Of course, it's also the first time that voters have had a chance to vote on a gay-marriage law passed by legislature (rather than implemented via the courts.)[22]
Voters have rejected gay marriage 31 states, most recently in Maine, where voters repealed a gay marriage law on Tuesday.[7]
Unlike 31 other states including Ohio where voters have passed constitutional amendments to ban marriage, the Maine vote was only to repeal a law.[15]
Republican Sen. Dan Swecker of Rochester fought Senate Bill 5688 in the Legislature and was disappointed by the direction of the R-71 vote. "Whether it passes by 1 percent or loses by 1 percent, it's a little discouraging to see that our society has gotten to the point where basically it's a 50-50 split ' rather than just an overwhelming reinforcement of marriage,"' Swecker said. He said a reversal of the vote count is unlikely but he was not willing to give up hope, and the Office of the Secretary of State says nearly 395,000 ballots still are in hand for counting statewide. "People made a big fuss over whether it's marriage or not.[8] About fifty percent of the ballots cast were counted as of yesterday, with 52 percent of voters approving the measure and 48 percent opposed, reports the New York Times. The state largely votes by mail, and final counts are expected late this week.[3] Nearly all of the state's voters now vote by mail and ballots only need to be postmarked by Election Day, not counted by Election Day, so many ballots won't actually be counted until Wednesday or Thursday.[9]
If R-71 passes, it will mark the first time gay rights are upheld by voters in any state election across the country, according to the Seattle Times.[3] The 2008 presidential election drew more than 80 percent voter turnout in Washington state.[16] One day people will wonder why it took us so long and how we could have thought it was wrong. Its a proud day for Washington state voters and citizens - straight or gay- who stand up for justice for all.[6] This is a sad day in Washington state history. Gays have always degraded the society they live in.[6] I live in Washington State and voted''to Reject Ref 71. I think that this''shows that most of the hate comes from the pro-gay marriage side.[12] Most of Washington State'''s population lives in Western Counties who approved referendum with low turnout while low population live in Eastern Counties who rejected the referendum with highest turnout.[19] The figures show an amazing thing, whole of state is looking distributed on issue the Eastern Counties have rejected the referendum while majority of Western Washington Counties have approved it except Pierce County.[19] Hey, #398239, at 5.49P: There were voters in every county of Washington who approved this referendum, so you're wrong about it being a Seattle thing. We can stay on this site of the mountains, if you wish, and you will benefit not one cent of our tourist or tax dollars.[6] All eastern Washington counties overwhelmingly voted to reject the referendum while a majority of western Washington counties approved it, with the exception of Pierce County.[16]
After Thursday's vote count in Washington, Referendum 71 was being approved 52 percent to 48 percent.[6]
In 1997, even supposedly liberal, libertarian Washington rejected a gay anti-discrimination law by a landslide, 60 percent to 40 percent. That vote set back the drive for gay equality here by nearly a decade.[20] Put the subject of equality for gays and lesbians to a vote of the people -- practically any people, in states from deep red to dark blue -- and the people have always said: "No. Not here.[20] Levinson said that if the vote trend continues, '''we'''ll be making history in our state in moving forward toward full equality for gay and lesbian families in our state.'''[4]
Of course, I forgot to mention that a higher concentration of gays and lesbians are in the urban areas of the state too. This obviously affects the vote as well.[4]
With yesterday's vote, that gate seems more open then it was yesterday, and our goal seems closer to reality than ever. "Congratulations to Washington's gay and lesbian community and all those who have supported our cause along the way."[8]
The gay-rights group Basic Rights Oregon recently said it hopes to relaunch the conversation here about that subject in preparation for a ballot measure in a few years, perhaps 2012. It's an important conversation to have. Of course, Basic Rights Oregon announced its intentions before the votes in Maine and Washington.[2] People ought to be able to go to the internet and read the petitions of people who are asking that something that should be put on the ballot. What is supposed to happen to you if someone sees you name on the petition list? Someone's going to ask why you signed it? They're going to ring your doorbell and run? Your manager is going to retaliate by denying you a promotion? You need 138,000 signatures to get a measure on the ballot in Washington. I can't see the manager at your job leafing through 138,000 signatures to find employees who may have signed a petition on a subject they may or may not agree with. I would think he or she has far more important things to do. Or am I wrong? Are there that many people living their lives fearful of people they think are going after them. Is this widespread? You're sitting out there, shivering and worrying that somebody's looking up your tax returns or your property records, or harassing you? It seems to me the matter of harassment and retaliation has been blown greatly out of proportion.[11] We're talking about the names of people who want to petition the matter to the ballot. We're talking people taking about an official act as citizen electors of this democracy. Why the worry that signing a petition is going to come out at home, at work, at church? These are issues we talk about at home, at work, at church, among family, among friends, among co-workers.[11]
Disclosure threatens the right to privacy, which is under assault by a spreading movement -- call it thuggish liberalism -- that uses intimidation to suppress political participation. Ask this question: If you donate money to a political cause, should that be made public? If you say yes, why is there a problem making public the names of people who sign petitions.[11]
Disclosure laws do not carve out an exemption for certain individuals to influence the legislative process and remain anonymous. Given the state of our politics, few have as much influence over state law these days as the signers of initiatives. The courts would create such an exemption if this ruling is allowed to stand. It shouldn't. Creating bad law is no solution to stopping the intimidation of those who exercise their First Amendment right to sign a petition. Greater public exposure and rejection of these tactics, and a reminder that turnabout is the unfortunate by-product of such politics, might, however. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission.[17]
The referendum is on a new state law that some say establishes same-sex marriage. This is a matter about which people differ.[18] Things were not looking so rosy in Maine, however, where the effort to cast a 'people's veto' of the state's same-sex marriage law appeared to pass by a three percent margin.[15]
No on 1, the organization fighting to keep the same-sex marriage law, is not conceding defeat, however. At press time, they argued, absentee and early votes had not been counted, and the full results of the towns and villages were not tallied.[15] With only one exception, the gay side has lost every time marriage has been put to a public vote.[15] The people who worry tend to point to the Proposition 8 battle over gay marriage in California where people who donated money faced retaliation. Of course, those names will be made public anyway since they are financial contributors, but that's not what we're talking about.[11] Protect Marriage Washington wanted to keep the names secret. Those who argued to keep the names private said they feared reprisals. Once names are made public, they might be targeted by political groups or people with a political ax to grind.[11]
The issue has been a contentious one, with anti-gay groups successfully delaying the release of names on the petitions placing the issue on the ballot. They argued that those who had signed the petitions faced threats and recriminations if their names were placed before the public.[15] I see no reason why petitions to place names on the ballot should not be a matter of public record. I see no reason why they should not be listed on the internet; that's exactly where they should be.[11]
Putting a matter to petition on the ballot is a public act. If we have a problem where people lose their jobs or are attacked for expressing their opinions, our challenge is to make certain that such retaliation doesn't occur, so that the right of free speech --and signing a petition is such a right-- is protected, not hidden.[11]
I don't intend to disagree just on principle but I legitimately don't see how you expect it to have a differing economic impact on the rest of us? For example. two same-sex people are in a lifetime partnership. One isn't working, but is on her partners insurance. -Ok-. Explain to me how that is any different than a hetero couple, where the unemployed husband is on his wife's insurance policy? How is there a difference? The point I was trying to make, and that I still stand by, is that you can NOT say our area is "open minded" or "diverse", when those who lead alternative lifestyles are discriminated against, treated with prejudice, and put in a different category of rights as "the rest of us".[4] Same-sex couples can now use sick leave to care for a partner, and gain rights with adoption, child support and custody. "This is a day for which we can all look back with pride," one supporter tells the AP.[23] Gay rights activists countered that while the marriage debate was for another day, same-sex couples need additional legal protections and rights in the meantime.[7]
In Oregon, Basic Rights Oregon is taking the first steps to repeal Measure 36 and legalize gay marriage, perhaps as soon as 2012.[22] Your definition of "fine" needs more explanation. This referendum didn't create gay marriage. It's difficult to take opponents of this law seriously when you don't even know what you're voting against.[6] During the campaign, opponents argued the law is a stepping-stone to gay marriage.[7]
Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall. 3.[21] Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract. 4.[21]
Have it your way: draw up articles of secession and I'll gladly help fund your efforts. There are gay people in every town, in every county, in every state, in every country on this planet.[6] There's a week's worth of ballot-counting remaining in an election everyone is saying is too-close-to-call. It appears Washington state will be the first in America to approve a gay-equality measure not by court fiat or legislative action, but by the direct will of the people. It's never happened before.[20] In Washington State, they've got a couple of bombshell ballot measures. I-1033 is a TABOR measure, similar to the one we beat here in 2006 ( measure 48 ), but 2006 is a very different environment than 2009.[22]
The east-west divide showed the measure passing in the traditionally more liberal, urban counties of northwest Washington, including King County, which holds about a third of the state'''s voters.[4] Voters in easern Washington aren'''t part of that history-making statement, however. '''On this measure, you can see the divide in thinking runs right along the Cascades,''' said Fredi Simpson, Chelan County GOP chairwoman. '''Cross into eastern Washington and you find voters who have strong beliefs in this matter. As pretty much expected, they rejected it.'''[4]
Columbia County, in the southeast corner of the state, posted a 66 percent voter turnout compared to King County's 23.55 percent rate. Another highly contested state measure, I-1033, centered on limiting the growth in state, county and city budgets was rejected 55.64 percent to 44.54 percent.[16] Voters were approving it in most Western Washington counties around Puget Sound, and rejecting it in the rest of the state. The take-away: The gay-rights movement has won over to its side 10 to 12 percent of this state in the past dozen years. That's about 1 percent per year. That may not seem like much.[20] The only relevant information about referendums is in the text of the propositions. In 1973, Washington's secretary of state ruled that signing an initiative or referendum petition is "a form of voting" and violating voters' privacy could have adverse "political ramifications" for those signing.[18] Conservatives here, a droll minority, say that under this city's quota system, when a conservative enters the city, one already here is required to leave. They also say Washington is actually two states: There is what you can see from atop this city's Space Needle -- meaning, this liberal city -- and there is everything else, extending to the Oregon, Idaho and Canadian borders. Today, Washington residents will vote in a referendum that has national significance because of a controversy about disclosing the names and addresses of those who signed petitions to trigger the referendum.[18]
The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court which, for the time being, let stand a lower court ruling ordering Washington's secretary of state not to disclose the names. We don't see how such a ruling stands up on the merits of the case or in the face of common sense.[17] The overall impact is incremental and cumulative and it continues to grow every time a new layer of legislation like this is added to the already cumbersome and pre-existing layers of bureaucracy that define our state of Washington.[4]
Sen. Ed Murray, a Seattle Democrat who spearheaded the law, called it "a great step forward for equality in Washington state." "I'm relieved," he said.[7] While most of Washington state's populous is located in a few counties in western Washington--primarily King, Snohomish and Pierce--voter turnout was highest in eastern Washington counties that rejected the referendum.[16]
As for the marriage / domestic partner issue itself. The voters are deciding if they want the state to treat marriage and living together as exactly the same. [12] Hutchison had not formally conceded as of Tuesday night, though Constantine declared victory. In a statement Tuesday night, Gov. Chris Gregoire congratulated Constantine on his win. "I look forward to working with him on issues of common importance to the state and the county, such as the potential for flooding in the Green River valley and the economic recovery of our region," Gregoire said. Overall voter turnout was down dramatically since this time last year.[16] Medical aid group raises alarm about AIDS funding A medical aid group says funding for AIDS is threatened, and that could set back "dramatic" progress in decreasing HIV illness and death. Analysis: Election lessons will shape '10 campaign By Liz Sidoti What we learned from the off-year elections: The president's influence is limited, independents rule, incumbents beware, issues trump ideology and, once more, "It's the economy, stupid." Florida activists continue to push for tougher hate crime statutes By Joseph Erbentraut Ryan Keith Skipper's brutal murder in 2007 and the death of a Broward County man nearly six months after two men attacked him near his home are among the cases that have motivated Florida activists to lobby Tallahassee lawmakers to enact tougher hate crime statutes in the Sunshine State. Mr. International Rubber gears up for kinky weekend in Chicago By Joseph Erbentraut The 13th annual Mr. International Rubber will take place this weekend at the Center on Halsted in Chicago.[1]
Support for Referendum 71 is coming almost exclusively from the state's northwestern quarter, with the southwest and the east opposed. (Thurston County is the lone exception, although it is on the border of the northwest and southwest).[10] A county breakdown shows the state was drastically divided on Referendum 71.[16]
The measure faces at least 60 percent rejection by voters in all four counties, with more than 70 percent of Grant County voters giving a thumbs-down to the referendum. [4] By a landslide -- 60 percent to 40 percent -- voters decided discrimination was just fine, so long as it targeted gays and lesbians. Voters rejected a law that would have outlawed discrimination against this minority. That's pretty amazing when you consider what's happening this week.[2] In 1997, Washington voters delivered a devastating defeat to gays and lesbians.[2]
Really? Know any gays/lesbians who think so? I guess it depends on who you ask, doesn't it? I for one do not, did not, and will not support gay and lesbian rights.[6] One signal event in that evolution was the inclusion of the Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution. None of those rights are for sale for any price, nor should they be. Perhaps you'd be more comfortable living in Afghanistan - I hear they're in about the 14th century right now, and they definitely don't have civil rights for gays there. As for the rest of your post, I challenge you to show me anywhere on this site where I've used the phrase "close-minded".[4] I signed the original bill and believe it is the right policy for our great state.[10]
Democratic Sen. Ed Murray of Seattle sponsored the "everything but marriage" rights bill that religious conservatives forced onto the ballot in the form of R-71.[8]
You could wall yourselves off like the revelers in The Masque of the Red Death and your sons and daughters will still enact marriage rights for all where you live. It might be next year, it might be the year after, it might be five or ten or twenty years from now, your children will make marriage rights for all the law of the land and there's nothing you can do about it. Your grandchildren, when they learn about this in history class, will wonder what the fuss was all about. (Psssst.[6] Economic concerns have shaped civil rights for thousands of years - for better or for worse. Why is it that liberals always break out the "close-minded" card, until it comes back on them - and then, suddenly, their own close-mindedness is re-named as some P.C. -esque term, designed to establish guilt in the opposition, like "but we need equality and diversity", etc., etc.[4] Thanks to everyone that supported equality by voting yes on Ref. 71. My question is why does it matter what others do in their personal lives? I have never met a gay person who has tried to make me gay, and I will never try and make a gay person straight. They deserve to have the same rights as everyone else. "I have gay friends and I respect them, but I will admit that I don't believe in what they practice. :( " That's all right.[16] We are Americans that also happen to be gay. We are all these things yet are not seen as equal citizens under the law. This win on Ref. 71 is a step in the right direction for human rights. This fight is far from over and we must continue to fight hard for equality under the law.[16]
The move, a victory for gay rights activists, will give the partners access to health care and other benefits.[23] If rejected, previously enacted legislation on domestic partnerships with fewer benefits to gay couples would remain in place.[4] People were battling over creating a parallel legal universe of domestic partnerships. That idea in and of itself seemed radical to many.[2] The exception is Arizona, which defeated a marriage and domestic partnership ban in 2006.[15] Even though Oregon already has a domestic partnership law, R-71 will show whether the anti-gay forces have much clout in the Northwest.[22]
Last year, lawmakers expanded the law to give domestic partners standing under laws covering probate and trusts, community property and guardianship.[7] According to an Associate Press report, the passing of the referendum will allow domestic partners to additional rights previously only given to married couples.[5]
My own daughters grew up in the midst of heterosexual and homosexual couples and have turned out to be two wonderful, accepting, loving, successful young ladies. It not only has not affected them negatively, but I believe has paved the road for them to approach everyone with the same respect. I honestly fail to understand the small minds of people who would begrudge somebody else the same rights they are already able to enjoy! What difference does it make to one individual, whom another individual loves and cares for. I have yet to hear one valid argument how the same rights for everyone affects one group negatively! It is a shame how some people still think, they are different and better than others. it's exactly that bigotry and small mindedness that keeps us from growing into the right direction and from pulling together as a whole.[16] The truth is, I don't think it matter(s) what we call it. It is marriage in everything but the name," Swecker said of R-71. He said his opposition is not on moral grounds but on a basis of what he thinks it will do to traditional marriage. "It's purely a matter of sustaining marriage as we know it and preserving the traditional function. In countries where this has happened it has led to a de-emphasis on marriage and were people get married. Marriage then ceases to provide all the vital functions for society that it traditionally has," he said.[8] Permission is given to repost no more than the headline, byline, and one or two paragraphs, with the full name of the Gay People's Chronicle and a link to the full article on our website.[15]
The reality is, progress on gay rights has moved so quickly, over all, that the goal posts have shifted now -- and that's the nature of a civil rights struggle. It gathers momentum, sweeps people along with it, redefining fairness as it goes.[2] Gator (J Bone) says. Hey Resi, I couldn't tell if your post was meant to paint rural people in a positive or negative light, but I do agree with you, that "It's much harder to condemn or deny rights to a neighbor than a stranger", but would also like to point out that "neighbor" relationship also leads to much more civility, good will, and the general "niceness" that you see in a small town vs. the rude, only-thinking-about-themselves attitude of city people. You are far less likely to "give the bird" to someone driving down the street if you know you will see them again around town.[4]
What is wrong is if you try to force other people to abide by your beliefs. That is not fair. Honestly. are people really this IGNORANT!! Being gay in these times is just like it was back in the early 1900's if you were black. People were just as stupid to treat and hate others because of their skin color. It isn't the color of someone's skin nor their sexual preference that makes the person. It is who they are on the inside. just like yourself.[16] Plato is one of the founders of philosophy. The list of what this gay loving society gave to the world is endless. It is people like you who degrade the societies they live in by not recognizing the contributions of all it's members.[6]
Not a citizen in good standing of the feral and state governments. It is NONE of your business on who sleeps with who beyond protecting minors and the mentally incapable.'' if you don't like gay marriages. don't be involved in one.'' It is that simple.''[12]
Why do you have to change things? Marriage has been working just fine for over what. hundreds of years without having gays and lesbians having a say so. [6] One can not convince anyone to be gay any more than someone can convince someone to be left-handed. This has been around for a while, but I find it entertaining and wry: 10 reasons why gay marriage should be illegal 1.[21] Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms.[21] Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears''' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed. 6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children.[21]
Washington's 'everything-but-marriage' measure joins similar ones in New Jersey, Oregon and California, where marriage was legal for five months last year until a ban amendment was passed. [15] Five other states have full same-sex marriage: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and in January, New Hampshire.[15] The anti-gay campaign to repeal the law, however, was met with challenges before the state's election commission, where the National Organization for Marriage was accused of violating state financial disclosure laws.[15] The law was to take effect July 26, but was delayed because of the referendum campaign. It will now take effect Dec. 3, according to the secretary of state's office.[7] On Tuesday, voters in Maine repealed a gay-marriage law that had been passed by that state's Legislature.[20] Mail ballots are still being counted. It looks as if Washington voters are about to go where no state voters have gone before.[2] Yeah, that's what the state of Washington needs more of. Those dry side family values.[6]
Apparently if you are younger than 60 and living with a person of the opposite sex you are out of luck in Washington. This bill doesn't level the playing field, it just diminishes the special significance of marriage. Another way to reverse the descrimination by talking about inclusion. Before it's too late.''[12] Larry Stickney, head of Protect Marriage Washington, which worked for rejection of R-71, said: "There are a lot of votes out there still.[14]
Currently, liberals enthralled by intimidation are trying to abolish secret ballots in unionization votes. When Humana, the private health-insurance provider, recently warned its customers about some provisions of Congress' health-care legislation, the Obama administration's reaction was essentially a quote from a Ring Lardner short story: "Shut up, he explained." It is time to speak up about thuggish liberalism, especially when it tries to suppress participation in referendums, which often involve contentious issues. [18] Referendum 71 currently has about 52% of the votes, and a margin of 60,000, with 72% of ballots counted.[23] With about 72 percent of the expected vote counted Thursday in unofficial returns, Referendum 71 was leading 52 percent to 48 percent, with a margin of about 60,000 votes.[7] Referendum 71 is passing tonight by nearly 38,000 votes, double the margin of victory on election night Tuesday.[8]
The state continues to count mail ballots, but with about 69% of the expected vote counted Thursday, the AP called the election.[13] State elections officials say there are an estimated 395,000 ballots in hand statewide that still need to be counted.[8]
States have requirements to put something on the ballot by initiative petition.[11] Some organization run by people we don't know (because we're going to keep that secret) goes out and allegedly collects the required number of signatures --say 138,000, which is the required number in the state of Washington-- and turns them, allegedly, over to the appropriate authority is that receives the petitions.[11] Actually, it's not about East and West, it's about urban and rural. If you look at the voting map for this measure on the Secretary of State site, you'll see that. People who aren't connected with the land, seasons and earth tend to be more connected with their thoughts, issues and ideas (I include myself in the second group--I wouldn't last long if I didn't have electricity and grocery stores).[4] I agree that the issue is not about East vs. West, but, as I see it, the issue is increasingly becoming what Seattlites want vs. everyone else. Is it any wonder that Northern California has been trying to become its own state for twenty-some years? People in Northern CA are sick of yielding to every whim of people who live in Los Angeles.[4]
All you have to do is take a road trip to Idaho and observe the huge discount in gas prices there as compared to here and eat in a very nice restaurant there and observe similar menu discounts as compared to here. Everything costs much more in this state and we all simply accept that truth without really knowing why it exists. When you say you don't expect this particular legislation to have an economic impact on all of us, what you are simply failing to see is that there already exists a huge relative tax burden on the people of this state simply because we choose to live and work here.[4]
I'm sure you've all heard of "trickle-down economics" and how that supposedly doesn't work? Well, when you hear of trickle-down taxation you better believe that one works and it works very well every single time you pay retail for any good or service. People just don't see it hidden in the price because it doesn't come with a disclosure label attached to it, but you better believe it's factored into the retail price you pay every single time. That said, R-71 will now raise prices on virtually everything brokered in this state because everything brokered in this state is made up of employees somewhere in the manufacturing process before you, the consumer, ultimately pays retail for it.[4] Congrats from Boston! This was an historic result. It shows that people are not buying what antigay folks are selling anymore, and everyone knows time is on our side, as young voters come of age and replace older, more antigay voters.[6] You're acting in contravention of one democracy's greatest attributes: The right of people to disagree with each other on political matters. Vendettas, boycotts --those things happened in the Prop 8 debate in California (on both sides, incidentally) but they are not in the best interests of a self-governing democracy by any stretch of the imagination.[11] Thursday Nov 5, 2009 Stunned and angry, national gay rights leaders Wednesday blamed scare-mongering ads - and President Barack Obama's lack of engagement - for a bitter election setback in Maine that could alter the dynamics for both sides in the gay-marriage debate.[1] Theres no question that those that come frond the more "rural" areas tend to exercise more closed- minded, critical views than those in urban areas. We may be more "friendly" with our neighbors here. but that is of course only as long as they are white, and sure as heck not gay. This area is way too rooted in old, prehistoric ways of thinking to embrace the kind of diversity necessary to accept another human beings right to engage in a lifestyle that has no effect on us whatsoever.[4] To Reverend Ken Hutcherson and Senator Val Stevens: The Lord works in mysterious ways. Yes he does indeed! Congratulations to all citizens of. YES! Finally a move forward into the right direction! Since its voter approved, at least we dont have to listen to right-wingers.[14] Last fall, in fact, California voters approved Proposition 8, erasing same-sex marriage.[2] The law, dubbed the '''everything but marriage''' law by the media, was approved by lawmakers in the spring.[13]
The referendum addresses approval or rejection of a law already on the books, Senate Bill 5688, which was supposed to take effect July 26. [4] Referendum 71 also sparked two lawsuits about transparency and financial disclosure laws, one which is expected to be heard by the Supreme Court.[13] If the slim lead holds for the gay-partnership law Referendum 71, it would be a landmark.[20]
Larry Stickney, a social conservative and president of the Washington Values Alliance, says disclosure of the identities of petition-signers will enable "ideological background checks" that will have a chilling effect on political participation. He frequently encounters people who flinch from involvement with the referendum when they learn that disclosure of their involvement is possible. He has received abusive e-mails and late-night telephone calls, and has seen a stranger on his front lawn taking pictures of his house. [18] The matter that needs resolution is the intimidation and retaliation, not the public disclosure or people petitioning to the ballot. To retaliate against someone because they hold an opinion different from your own is not only puerile (childish), but it also strikes a blow at the very concept of democracy. I suppose you think if you're retaliating against someone because of what they believe that you're acting in good faith.[11] From what I've seen, there's a bigger disconnect in rural communities: a tendency to think of Tom and Bill down the street as your neighbors Tom and Bill, whom you know very well and think the world of, and still have an idea of "the gays" in general as, at best, those weird people in video from a Pride parade.[4]
Far from being "anti-gay", the petition in question is simply a matter of putting the bill for an up-or-down vote by the electorate.[12] You have to secure a certain number of signatures --usually not a high threshold but a significant number of voters. Signatories must have certain qualifications to sign these petitions --legal age, legal resident, registered to vote, and so forth.[11] Thank God that we voters in King County and other western counties vote in sufficient numbers to control the outcome. Hey, to those in Eastern Washing who don't like that, t-t-t-tough noogies.[6] Just like Washington voters reliably elect Democrats to the U.S. Senate, and Democrats as governors.[6] I must take issue with your statement: "Voters in eastern Washington aren'''t part of that history-making statement, however."[4]
I vehemently disagree with "Cactus'" blanket assessment of all rural types as being akin to refugees from the set of "Deliverance." There ARE gay and lesbian couples throughout the region, in smaller outlying towns than even Wenatchee, who are well received by their neighbors, are productive members of the community, and have no particular issues as to how they perceive their treatment in the area.[4] Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn'''t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren'''t full yet, and the world needs more children. 7.[21]
Because the vote signals, finally, a tipping point of sorts -- a bellwether of public acceptance -- that has eluded gays and lesbians forever.[20] Usually to bar overt acts of discrimination against gays (which Seattle voters did way back in 1978).[20] Well. if you personally don't fall into that category, then that is one thing. but as far as "the community" goes. my opinion isn't based on just my opinion. the fact that 61% of Chelan, 67% of Douglas, 71% in Grant and 62% of voters on Okanogan county prove my point. These aren't on the fence numbers, either. These are majority numbers. representing people incapable of leaving their religious beliefs out of politics, and instead forcing them onto others.[4] LGBT People deserve to be treated equally, and until that day when we are all equal in the eyes of the law it is necessary to have this kinds of legislation to protect everyone from the bigoted and ignorant.[16] People who are secretive, have petitioned to put something on the ballot, securing the signatures of people whose identities are secret, to put something on the ballot on which we'll vote in secret.[11]
As of tonight, I've vowed that Sweetie and I will be spending our tourism dollars in states that support equal rights. [16] Speaking of tides, the economic anxiety that buoyed Republicans and anti-tax candidates in other parts of the nation failed to buoy initiative huckster Tim Eyman here. His Initiative 1033 went down to defeat, even though he had said (and I felt he was right) that this year was one of the best political climates he'd had for passing one of his government-restricting measures. Maybe this initiative was just a particularly bad idea (it was). Or maybe the slow wheel of change has tilted against Eyman, too. Time for him to take the hint.[20] Economic concerns may have shaped civil rights for thousands of years, but many of us have evolved past the cave-man days.[4]
Insurance rights, including rights under group policies, policy rights after death of spouse, conversion rights, and continuing coverage rights. Legal process rights, such as the ability to sign certain documents, the requirement to join in certain petitions, rights to cause of action, and ability to transfer licenses without charge.[6] Some say approval would be a step closer to same-sex marriage. It spawned another controversy: Whether you can or cannot disclose the names and addresses of those who sign petitions that trigger petition initiatives.[11] Here's an idea, stay on your side of the mountains you freak lovers Typical hatemonger. To chicken to even put an ID to his ignorance. There will be plenty of unregistered users on this soundoff that will spew their moronic babble before this is done. Heck they don't even have the courage to let their names be listed on a public petition.[6]
Does that sound like a democracy to you? The alternative would have to be that we would take the word of whatever state official received the petitions, which could lead to all sorts of political skullduggery. [11] Silent and stern in the sweltering night, The mob moves like demons possesed. Quiet in conscience, calm in their right, Confident their ways are best.[6] When it comes to gay acceptance, that shift has now happened. That's the big story of Election 2009. It's going to keep inching like that, a mostly one-way tide.[20] Why would anybody on the West side travel to the land of 1980's hairdo's and missing teeth? We'll just stay here and have our flamboyant gay pride parade without the cattle skulls and brown polyester leisure pants, but thanks anyway, Festus.[6] Medicallycorrect if Gays have always degraded the society they live in why do we look at ancient greece and consider it to be one of the foundations of civilization.[6]
Fyi. economically, there are same-sex couples out there who contribute more economically than some married folks. It does happen. Keep in mind we are the same country that also once thought it was ok to restrict someones rights and deny their liberties because they were black (racial discrimination). as well as for being a woman. [4]
SOURCES
1. EDGE Boston :: News
2. A big leap forward in the state of Washington | The Stump - - OregonLive.com
3. Feminist Wire Daily Newsbriefs: U.S. and Global News Coverage
4. NCW rejects '''everything but marriage''' | Local news, sports, weather, blogs, opinion, crime, obituaries, business, directory, marketplace, education, high school, family, shopping, arts, entertainment, movies, books, cooking, auto, real estate, jobs, classifieds, photos, videos, comics, contests, and mountain pass webcams from Wenatchee, East Wenatchee, Chelan, Leavenworth, Waterville, Cashmere, Quincy, Entiat, North Central Washington newspaper
5. Washington state approves gay partnership rights measure
6. Washington voters approve expanded gay rights
7. The Associated Press: Gay partnership measure approved by voters
8. Sen. Murray declares a win for same-sex partners - The Politics Blog - The Olympian - Olympia, Washington
9. Windy City Times - Washington voters may affirm domestic partnerships
10. Northwest Progressive Institute Advocate: Governor Gregoire issues statement on the passage of Referendum 71
11. If you sign a petition, should your name be made public?
12. CBS Paints Pro-Traditional Marriage Petitioners as Anti-Gay Rights | NewsBusters.org
13. Washington State Voters Approve Gay Partner Law | On Top Magazine :: Gay & Lesbian News, Entertainment, Commentary & Travel
14. Local News | Voters approve Referendum 71 | Seattle Times Newspaper
15. Two out of three ain't bad
16. Seattle University Spectator - Ref. 71 heading for victory despite low voter turnout
17. PD Editorial: Signer beware | PressDemocrat.com | The Press Democrat | Santa Rosa, CA
18. GoErie.com: Other Opinions - George Will: Stop 'thuggish' liberals
19. Pierce County Election Results
20. American Chronicle | Seattle Times Danny Westneat column: Right here, right now, history is incubating
21. CHS Capitol Hill Seattle Blog | Seattle PostGlobe - Top News: Elections roundup: I-1033 trails, R-71 leads, Constantine apparent winner over Hutchison
22. BlueOregon: Election Day 2009: What I'll be watching
23. 'Everything But Marriage' Law for Gays Passes in Wash. - Politics News Summaries | Newser
GENERATE A MULTI-SOURCE SUMMARY ON ANY SUBJECT
Enter your search query below. WAIT 10-20 sec for the new window to open.
Get more info on Voters approve Referendum 71 by using the iResearch Reporter tool from Power Text Solutions.
 |
|  |
|
