Glenden BrownWhen Bigots Pass Laws
With time to enshrine their bigotry in law running short, our state legislators are getting worried they won’t be able to tell gay folks “You suck.”
SB299 (sub one or two I don’t remember which) is trundling its way through the state legislature. In what looks like a straight party line vote, the repugnant repubs in our state senate trotted out their best:
“My desire is that we don’t encroach on marriage, that it remain pre-eminent,” said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Greg Bell, R-Fruit Heights.
You wouldn’t want those uppity queers thinking their relationships mattered would you?
Showing a cluelessness we should expect, consider this exchange between Chris “I hate everybody whose not me or Gayle Ruzicka” Buttars and Scott McCoy:
McCoy, who is openly gay, spoke of an incident in which a close friend was unable to visit her longtime partner in intensive care. The unconscious partner’s mother had never approved of the relationship and denied her access.
“The hospital was in a difficult dilemma at that point,” McCoy said. “This would be one more tool to help them sort out that situation.”
Sen. Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan, argued that such situations have nothing to do with SB299.“I believe that could be a problem,” Buttars said. “But that’s between the mother and the partner.”
One of the core issues affecting non-traditional couples is hospital visitation. Guess what provision in the law was removed by our collective of bigots? You guessed it - hospital visitation.
IOW, they want to make sure that the queers stay in their place. Assholes.
March 4th, 2008 at 7:18 am
How’s that any different than corporations and government combined in fascist matrimony? Where are the serious legislators rush to limitations?
March 4th, 2008 at 11:57 am
I agree with you. Although I am about as homophobic as they come, Utah’s approach to homosexuals has been rather heinous to say the least. This is admittedly a paradigm shift for me; refer to some of my early comments on this blog and older posts on my blog for clarification. It is a miscarriage of justice to deny couples in loving committed relationships legal privileges of their commitment. Amendment 3 is wrong, and this bill is wrong.
Although I find homosexuality appalling personally, bigotry is bigotry and shouldn’t be ingrained in public policy.
March 4th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
All a gay couple has to do is make each other “power of attorney” which is available under existing laws and hospital visitation, and financial considerations are taken care of. We really do not need special laws for domestic partners when there are already laws that can be employed. Gay couples just need to know what is already available to them under existing statutes.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
akabrutus - to get approximately the same protections as marriage, a same gender couple has to spend something like ten thousand dollars and spend a huge amount of time. And even then, it’s not uncommon to hear of all that paperwork getting challenged in court. The existing laws don’t work to provide protections.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Philip - It takes a lot of courage to admit to the kind of paradigm shift you’re talking about it. Thanks.
March 4th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Glendon
$10,000 is a bargain compared to a wedding. Not to mention the time and effort planning one. I would settle for the legal bureaucracy over a wedding any day.
March 4th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Ken,
No one has to pay $10000 for a wedding to get the legal protections provided by marriage. In Salt Lake County all it takes is fifty bucks.
March 4th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Sadly, I think gay couples would have been further ahead to push for recognized civil unions instead of marriage. As Utah is a theocracy, and being gay isn’t accepted in the instruction manual, well, it is an uphill battle.
akabrutus nice piece of information. Love finds a way.
There is always the PNW, things like this are pretty well sorted out up here.
March 5th, 2008 at 6:42 am
Ken - as Don pointed out, it’s not about the wedding, it’s about the rights, responsibilities and protections of marriage. A marriage license is cheap. A wedding is expensive, no doubt, but it is actually optional.
Pop - there is a continual debate within the glbt community over the question of civil union versus marriage. Here’s the deal - back in 2004 when the Utah Taliban was pushing Amendment three, they swore up hill and down dale that it wouldn’t prevent same gender couples getting legal protections, just not marriage. Since then, the same lying two faced bigots have maintained that Amendment 3 prevents any sort of legal protections since they violate the amendments lagnuage about anything even a little bit like marriage.
March 5th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Time to move, the persecuted must make their exodus.
Even if you are given all rights, do you really wish to live the rest of your life in an enclave, while the society around you leers upon your sins?
Besides, I figure the supposed unavoidable global warming will render Utah hell on Earth, as if it wasn’t culturally already.
Gorgeous day in the trees up here. Not a gay basher in sight. Or in any position of power.