Vermont Commemorates Same-Sex Civil Unions With Historic-Site Marker
From NBCNEWS :
MONTPELIER, Vt. — Vermont is commemorating its first-in-the-nation civil union law and subsequent marriage equality legislation with a historic-site marker on the State House lawn.
The marker was ceremoniously unveiled Tuesday by two of the three gay couples who were plaintiffs in the Vermont Supreme Court case that led to civil unions, along with Beth Robinson, a lawyer at the time who served as co-counsel in the case and is now a Supreme Court justice.
"Since its founding, Vermont has been a leader in protecting and furthering civil rights, embracing diversity and promoting tolerance," Republican Gov. Phil Scott said.
Passing the civil union legislation in 2000 was the right thing to do and it took courage and commitment by many, said Scott, who was in the state Senate from 2001 to 2011 and voted for full marriage equality in 2009.
On Tuesday, he commended legislators, advocates and then-Gov. Howard Dean, a Democrat, for passing the policy that made Vermont the first state to grant legal recognition to same-sex couples.
State lawmakers passed marriage equality legislation in 2009, and the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide in 2015.
Having a marker commemorating the events is "unbelievable," said Lois Farnham, of Middlebury, who attended the ceremony with her partner, Holly Patterbaugh. The couple, now in their 70s, wore matching tie-dyed T-shirts bearing the message "It's Just Love."
Former state Rep. Herb Russell, a Democrat who received a civil union and later got married in Vermont, sought the marker because he believed the historic event deserved to be commemorated.
"We're very proud of the fact that the first civil union law was in Vermont," he said. "And I felt strongly that we needed to document that history and take great pride and claim our role in the historic path of equality in this country."
Democratic Rep. William Lippert also reflected Tuesday on the events that led to marriage equality in Vermont. He, too, received a civil union and later got married under the law.
"Little did I know how profoundly the courage of (then-House Speaker) Michael Obuchowski and (then-Gov.) Howard Dean would affect my life personally and the lives of thousands of Vermonters and tens of thousands of lesbian and gay couples in Vermont, across the country and indeed throughout the world," he said.
Tags
Who is online
85 visitors
Civil Unions was not the same as marriage, but it was a step in the right direction. It helped thrust the issue of same-sex marriage and the fight for marriage equality in the spotlight. After 15 years since the legal recognition of civil unions, same sex marriage finally became a right.
celebration of equal rights
i'm sure that won't sit well with some people... *sigh*
Unfortunately, you are probably right.
The Klan, the TEAparty or Focus On The Family, which are all the same, will hold a protest the site sometime next year.
Seriously?
Would you be surprised if social conservatives hold a protest at the site to oppose LGBT marriage equality?
Here is a minister who still opposes interracial marriage on religious grounds,
Many evangelical Christians still oppose interracial marriage,
A poll taken a few years ago found that 60% of the Mississippi GOP either wanted mixed-race marriages to be banned (46%) or weren't sure if they should be legal (14%).
No surprise that the AFA is based in that bigoted state.
Actually, not even a little.
Religious grounds is pretty much the only argument I've heard against same sex marriage. it's no wonder the theocrats lost nearly unanimously on the issue. They simply had no valid argument to begin with.
No surprise there either.
It definitely moved things forward, didn't it?
One of the few times in history that a Jim Crow law advanced civil rights.
I think it also underlies some of the legal complexity behind an international child abduction by anti-LGBT Christian extremists in the Miller-Jenkins case.
That's funny, because I was doing some research on that case recently; I wanted to see if there had been any updates. Apparently Lisa Miller and Isabella are still hiding out in Nicaragua.
Sometimes ya gotta take a baby step or two before starting to run
IIRC, one of the attorneys behind the original court order for marriage equality in Baker v Vermont was the same attorney who represented Jenkins. Mary Bonauto was the other plaintiff attorney in Baker v Vermont, and she went on to win Gil v OPM, Obergefell v Hodges, and I think she assisted Robbie Kaplan in the Windsor case. So while marriage equality was inevitable it's still interesting how one attorney can be central to winning it for several states and then for the entire country.
As I always say, every little bit helps.
The passage of "civil unions" in their various forms essentially made marriage equality inevitable in the states which had them. In each of those states they were struck down as unconstitutional by the state courts or federal courts either due to factual inequality or due to irrational stigmatization when they were technically equal for the purposes of the state (like in CA and NJ). As a CA court noted in 2005: "The idea that marriage-like rights without marriage is adequate smacks of a concept long rejected by the courts: separate but equal."
I have no doubt that was half the reason hate groups like NOM fought against civil unions in addition to marriage, because their legal strategists knew that the inherent inequity of a second class institution made marriage equality a certainty. The other half of the reason is simply that they hate gays and want to deny them any and all familial rights.
I would bet it's due more to the latter, rather than the former.
Yes it did. It was the proverbial shot in the arm. And here we are today with full marriage equality. Another step forward as a country in the 21st century. Of course, let's not forget pioneers who contributed to marriage equality, such as Edie Windsor and James Obergefell.
While the US is now enjoying marriage equality the EU is still suffering from the adverse and unintended consequences created by "civil unions". Here's one such catch-22 in an adoption case where France won't recognize a UK marriage because it was converted from a civil union , but won't let the couple get married in France because it recognizes the UK marriage .