RSSFair play gets its due with civil right bill for same-sex couples
Yakima Herald-Republic
E-mail
Print
More 'Opinion'
- Hastings has reason to be worried about nation's heavy debt
- Celebrate Independence Day! (John Adams said so)
- Get ready for summer rerun of curfew saga
- State's going down wrong path with alcohol
- This time, majority politics works in our favor
- We're all in this fight against graffiti
- 'Cash for clunkers' is a bit clunky
Fair play is having its day in the state Legislature, one step at a time.
Lawmakers have approved and sent to the governor House Bill 3104, which expands the state's domestic partnership law by granting same-sex couples more than 170 of the benefits and responsibilities given to married couples, including property and guardianship rights.
In the Central Washington delegation, only state Sen. Curtis King, R-Yakima, supported the legislation. Opposing it were Sens. Janéa Holmquist, R-Moses Lake, and Jim Honeyford, R-Sunnyside, and state Reps. Bruce Chandler, R-Granger; Bill Hinkle, R-Cle Elum; Dan Newhouse, R-Sunnyside; Charles Ross, R-Naches; and Judy Warnick, R-Moses Lake. Rep. Mary Skinner, R-Yakima, was excused from voting on final passage in the House.
Now let's cut to the heart of an issue too often clouded by irrelevant rhetoric: This is about legal rights, not sexual orientation or gay marriage.
The state Supreme Court upheld Washington's ban on same-sex marriage in a 5-4 decision in July 2006. But the court wasn't asked to weigh the pros and cons of such marriage. Rather, the nine justices ruled on whether the state's 1998 Defense of Marriage Act, which restricts marriage to a man and woman, passed constitutional muster.
Their ruling not only held that it did, but also pointed out that the responsibility for dealing with, and defining how to handle, same-sex issues is with the Legislature, not the courts.
"Marriage" has long clouded the civil rights debate as it relates to same-sex couples, largely because it is both a legal contract and a union with religious and moral overtones that assume heterosexuality. But for gay relationships, the former is denied because of laws written to appease the latter. That is wrong in a nation whose foundation of laws is built on the rights of individuals.
And with same-sex marriage still banned in this state, the Legislature is now addressing the civil rights part of the equation as it relates to domestic partnerships.
The issue in HB 3104 is legal rights for couples who cannot marry. The way was cleared on this rights issue last year when the Legislature approved legislation that established a domestic partnership registry. Since then, more than 3,500 couples have registered as domestic partners.
A ban on discrimination because of sexual orientation was added to state law prior to the domestic partnership legislation.
The bill adds domestic partners to sections of state laws where previously only spouses were mentioned, including areas referring to probate and trusts, community property and homestead exemptions, and guardianship and powers of attorney.
Last year's action already provides hospital visitation rights, the ability to authorize autopsies and organ donations and inheritance rights when there is no will.
The law also makes unmarried heterosexual senior couples eligible for domestic partnerships if one partner is at least 62. Lawmakers said that provision was included to help seniors who are at risk of losing pension rights and Social Security benefits if they remarry.
To us, it appears that this legislation is aimed at government-sanctioned favoritism provided to married couples in a creative and equitable manner by extending legal protections to same-sex couples who don't now have the option of marrying to get them.
That's what we mean by fair play in a civil rights issue long overdue for corrective action in the Legislature.
* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are Michael Shepard, Sarah Jenkins and Bill Lee.
