Friday, August 26, 2005
Getting Closer
Seems the rights of gay couples just got a little more sane- California (yes I know, it would have been a little more impressive if the bill was passed in say, Tennessee) has just ruled that children of gay couples are just as needy as ‘normal’ kids and therefore fall under the same financial burdens during break-ups. Read it here.
I love this.
In essence, it shows in a very rational way the true nature of the unfortunate chances we ALL take in our lives when we are with one another. More importantly it places the burden of the children upon their true parents- right where it should be.
Being an avid supporter of equality in marriage, I’d have to say that this is good news. The State of California has thrown a large bit of grim reality (key word, reality) into the whole debate.
I have always said that the ban on gay marriages is flat out, no question, a human rights issue. In it’s base argument- married couples are granted several legal and financial rights and privileges (trust me, I just got married). When a couple is not granted those rights based solely upon their sexual orientation the result is no less than legalized discrimination.
Granted, this is not exactly Brown V. Board of Education, but what California has done is said, in a small way, “you are the same as us.”
You won’t hear me say this often, but here goes- “Bravo California, bravo.”
SAN FRANCISCO - In the latest ruling to recognize rights of same-sex couples, the California Supreme Court has said gay and lesbian couples who raise children are lawful parents and must provide for their children if they break up.
The state’s custody and child support laws that hold absent fathers accountable also apply to estranged gay and lesbian couples who used reproductive science to conceive, the high court ruled Monday.
I love this.
In essence, it shows in a very rational way the true nature of the unfortunate chances we ALL take in our lives when we are with one another. More importantly it places the burden of the children upon their true parents- right where it should be.
Being a legal parent “brings with it the benefits as well as the responsibilities,” said Justice Joyce Kennard.
Being an avid supporter of equality in marriage, I’d have to say that this is good news. The State of California has thrown a large bit of grim reality (key word, reality) into the whole debate.
I have always said that the ban on gay marriages is flat out, no question, a human rights issue. In it’s base argument- married couples are granted several legal and financial rights and privileges (trust me, I just got married). When a couple is not granted those rights based solely upon their sexual orientation the result is no less than legalized discrimination.
Granted, this is not exactly Brown V. Board of Education, but what California has done is said, in a small way, “you are the same as us.”
You won’t hear me say this often, but here goes- “Bravo California, bravo.”
Comments:
<< Home
There's one big problem with this: because of the "Defense of Marriage Act", that obnoxiously named piece of discrimination, here's what could happen:
Gay couples whose lives were devasted by the hurricane are not eligible for assistance as couples due to DOMA. If they have kids, and the biological parent has been killed, the child will be TAKEN AWAY FROM THE OTHER PARENT and sent to foster care. The surviving partner is not eligible for any assistance or social security survivors benefits. The government doesn't recognize any relationship and thus the family is torn apart.
Gay couples whose lives were devasted by the hurricane are not eligible for assistance as couples due to DOMA. If they have kids, and the biological parent has been killed, the child will be TAKEN AWAY FROM THE OTHER PARENT and sent to foster care. The surviving partner is not eligible for any assistance or social security survivors benefits. The government doesn't recognize any relationship and thus the family is torn apart.
Oh, and the other day, the California senate voted to legalize same-sex marriage. Two more hurdles remain: the assembly and the Governator, who now faces a real dilemma. He's always made himself out to be a gay-friendly Republican, so will he sign the law and piss off the right, or not sign and piss off everyone else?
Meanwhile, the Republicans are up in arms because this is not "judicial activism" -- no judge forced this on anyone, the legislature has advanced it.
Post a Comment
Meanwhile, the Republicans are up in arms because this is not "judicial activism" -- no judge forced this on anyone, the legislature has advanced it.
<< Home