Thank you, Connecticut Supreme Court!

[Stella_Omega]

 

[TheeGoatPig]

Any particular reason for these thanks?

 

[epiphany65]

Good news, indeed!

From CNN:

HARTFORD, Connecticut (CNN) -- The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Friday that gay and lesbian couples have the right to get married.
The ruling makes Connecticut the third state, after Massachusetts and California, to decide its constitution mandates treating citizens equally when applying for marriage licenses, regardless of their sexual orientation.

"Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay persons are entitled to marry the otherwise qualified same sex partner of their choice," the ruling said.

"To decide otherwise would require us to apply one set of constitutional principles to gay persons and another to all others. The guarantee of equal protection under the law, and our obligation to uphold that command, forbids us from doing so. In accordance with these state constitutional requirements, same sex couples cannot be denied the freedom to marry."

The decision would only allow gay couples the state benefits of marriage. The Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996, denies gay couples federal recognition of state marriages, which provides for federal benefits with regard to Social Security, taxation, immigration and others.

Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire and New Jersey have civil unions.

In 2005, Connecticut became the first state to allow civil unions, intended to be marriage in all but name, without being forced by its courts. Two years later, Connecticut's Legislature tabled a bill allowing marriage.

Eight same-sex couple sued the state, saying that civil unions were not equal to marriage and that Connecticut's Constitution guaranteed them equal treatment.

In the dissent, one justice said he disagreed with the majority's opinion that "sexual orientation is a quasi-suspect class under our state constitutional provisions guaranteeing equal protection of the laws" because that point of view "unduly minimizes the unique and extraordinary political power of gay persons in this state."

A representative of Connecticut's commissioner of public health said he does not know when the state might start issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The suit was called Kerrigan and Mock v. the Connecticut Department of Public Health.

 

[rgraham666]

Yay!

Took you long enough.

 

[Stella_Omega]

three down, 47 to go.

vote no on prop 8!

 

[voluptuary_manque]

You go, Ct.!


NO ON PROP 8

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Slavery and child-brides were once legal, too.

 

[Belegon]

Yay Connecticut!!!!!!!!


No on Prop. 8 !

http://images.cafepress.com/product/315207320v2_240x240_Front.jpg

 

[impressive]

 

[Liar]

Coolness.

Um.. the department of public health? Is the legality of marriage a health issue?

 

[BlackShanglan]

Huzzah! Good sense triumphs.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Coolness.

Um.. the department of public health? Is the legality of marriage a health issue?

Ask any unwillingly unmarried couple if they feel perfectly well.

 

[3113]

Coolness.

Um.. the department of public health? Is the legality of marriage a health issue?

At a guess--and this is purely a guess--it might be a throwback to the days when some states/cities required couples to get certain tests to assure they didn't have a venereal disease before they'd be issued a marriage license. Hence, the license would be issued by the health department. Where I live they had this odd rule (may still have it) for I *think* gonorrhea (?) but, oddly, nothing else. Couples had to get a test for this VD in order to get a marriage license, unless they could swear they'd been living together for a year or more.

 

[wafflemtl]

...
The decision would only allow gay couples the state benefits of marriage. The Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996, denies gay couples federal recognition of state marriages, which provides for federal benefits with regard to Social Security, taxation, immigration and others.
...

If the others 47 states allow gay marriage, will it be compulsory for the federal to allow it to ? Or if the federal allow it, each state has to allow it to ? How does that work in the US ?

 

[Liar]

At a guess--and this is purely a guess--it might be a throwback to the days when some states/cities required couples to get certain tests to assure they didn't have a venereal disease before they'd be issued a marriage license.

And as we all know, homosexuality is a veneral disease.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, people who look back at "the good old days" and celebrate the "old time values" are batshit insane.

 

[Sandy_Fox]

And as we all know, homosexuality is a veneral disease.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, people who look back at "the good old days" and celebrate the "old time values" are batshit insane.

That is actually just plain old true. When I look back on my time in the service we went from "Oh shit! a queer" to "Don't ask, don't tell" to "Who the hell cares" (at least amongst the troops). I'll take the "new" time values any day!

 

[Svenskaflicka]

At a guess--and this is purely a guess--it might be a throwback to the days when some states/cities required couples to get certain tests to assure they didn't have a venereal disease before they'd be issued a marriage license. Hence, the license would be issued by the health department. Where I live they had this odd rule (may still have it) for I *think* gonorrhea (?) but, oddly, nothing else. Couples had to get a test for this VD in order to get a marriage license, unless they could swear they'd been living together for a year or more.

Wouldn't it be better to ALLOW people with gonorrhea to get married, to (hopefully) encourage them to stay together and not spread it to anyone outside that marriage..?

Way to go, anyhow. I'm against marriage myself, but I feel that everyone should be allowed to make that mistake if that's what their little hearts want.

 

[fieryjen]

Yay!

*throws confetti*

 

[TE999]

Yet another island of sanity in a diminishing sea of ignorance. Not to mention an affirmation of states rights to govern themselves.

Connecticut! Saaaloot!

 

[Sandy_Fox]

Wouldn't it be better to ALLOW people with gonorrhea to get married, to (hopefully) encourage them to stay together and not spread it to anyone outside that marriage..?

Way to go, anyhow. I'm against marriage myself, but I feel that everyone should be allowed to make that mistake if that's what their little hearts want.

WTF? Wouldn't it be EVEN BETTER to get it cured and not pass it on to anybody?

P.S. Been married to the same woman for 28 years and loved every one of them!

 

[Stella_Omega]

WTF? Wouldn't it be EVEN BETTER to get it cured and not pass it on to anybody?

Once upon a time, venereal diseases were incurable. It seems that "once upon a time" is coming around again...

rose: congrats on your marriage!)

 

[voluptuary_manque]

At a guess--and this is purely a guess--it might be a throwback to the days when some states/cities required couples to get certain tests to assure they didn't have a venereal disease before they'd be issued a marriage license. Hence, the license would be issued by the health department. Where I live they had this odd rule (may still have it) for I *think* gonorrhea (?) but, oddly, nothing else. Couples had to get a test for this VD in order to get a marriage license, unless they could swear they'd been living together for a year or more.

The California marriage blood test is for syphilis, not gonnorhea. It exists as a way of preventing the spread of disease because syphilis can exist symptom free for years once the chancre heals. However, it is still curable and has been for a very long time though today's treatments are a lot better than the old days when they used mercury!


VOTE NO ON 8

 

[Tyr51]

Double Post. So sorry!

 

[Tyr51]

Prop 8 is blessedly unconstitutional in CA. The idea of citizens being able to put up Propositions is wonderful, and I loved it while being Californian.... a way to circumvent the normal process if only enough citizens will sign!

However, you cannot change the State Constitution with a Proposition. It *has* to go through the regular channels. Over 50% of Californians believe that all couples have the right to a monogomous relationship with equal benefits under the State and Federal Government. There is *no* way there could be enough votes to change the constitution without massively pissing off the majority of citizens.

Still.... campaign. Please. It may be right. But it would be wonderful to stop it HERE, and not have to take it to further courts to prove the point.


Horray #3 State! NY cannot be far behind.

 

[Misty_Morning]

You go, Ct.!


NO ON PROP 8

Let's not forget Florida....


Please vote against the state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

Unfortunately Florida already has something similar to DOMA....but lets stop state sanctioned discrimination. Please.

Please VOTE NO FUCKING WAY.