Ohio Senate Approves Gay-Marriage Ban
Jan. 21st, 2004 10:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
judecorpOhio Senate Approves Gay-Marriage Ban
By ANDREW WELSH-HUGGINS, Associated Press Writer
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Lawmakers gave final approval Wednesday to a measure banning gay marriage and prohibiting state employees from getting benefits for domestic partners.
The bill is considered among the most far-reaching in the nation because of the benefits ban, which applies to unmarried heterosexual and homosexual couples.
The Senate passed the legislation on an 18-15 vote Wednesday. The House has already approved the bill and Gov. Bob Taft has said he will sign it, pending a legal review.
The measure says same-sex marriages are "against the strong public policy of the state," and aims to counter a 1934 U.S. Supreme Court ruling requiring states to recognize marriages from other states in most circumstances.
Thirty-seven states have passed laws recognizing marriage as a sacrament between men and women.
Ohio is the second state, after Nebraska, that would prohibit benefits for state employees' unmarried partners, said Seth Kilbourn, national field director for the Human Rights Campaign, a Washington-based gay and lesbian lobbying group.
Ohio lawmakers struggled with the issue for seven years, when then-Rep. Jay Hottinger introduced a bill in the House. Hottinger, now a senator, said the bill was not an attack on homosexuals but rather meant to protect a traditional definition of marriage.
"Ohio must be able to clearly establish and define our own laws rather than have another state or country define something as important as marriage," said Hottinger, a Republican.
Sen. Eric Fingerhut, a Cleveland Democrat, said the bill will hurt Ohio by limiting the ability of businesses and universities to attract talented people.
"If we pass this bill, get up tomorrow and look in the mirror," Fingerhut said. "Smiling back at you is someone who has slowed Ohio's progress by putting up a sign to people that says, 'We don't want you here.'"
The vote came despite opposition by some large companies. Dayton-based NCR Corp. sent a letter to lawmakers Dec. 12 saying the bill could hurt the company's ability to attract and retain employees.
Similar bills have been introduced in each session since Hottinger first introduced the legislation. But former Senate President Richard Finan, a Republican, blocked its passage. He said state law already took care of the matter.
~//~
I guess I can stop writing letters. Nearly four years after I moved here, the asshats have finally won. :(
By ANDREW WELSH-HUGGINS, Associated Press Writer
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Lawmakers gave final approval Wednesday to a measure banning gay marriage and prohibiting state employees from getting benefits for domestic partners.
The bill is considered among the most far-reaching in the nation because of the benefits ban, which applies to unmarried heterosexual and homosexual couples.
The Senate passed the legislation on an 18-15 vote Wednesday. The House has already approved the bill and Gov. Bob Taft has said he will sign it, pending a legal review.
The measure says same-sex marriages are "against the strong public policy of the state," and aims to counter a 1934 U.S. Supreme Court ruling requiring states to recognize marriages from other states in most circumstances.
Thirty-seven states have passed laws recognizing marriage as a sacrament between men and women.
Ohio is the second state, after Nebraska, that would prohibit benefits for state employees' unmarried partners, said Seth Kilbourn, national field director for the Human Rights Campaign, a Washington-based gay and lesbian lobbying group.
Ohio lawmakers struggled with the issue for seven years, when then-Rep. Jay Hottinger introduced a bill in the House. Hottinger, now a senator, said the bill was not an attack on homosexuals but rather meant to protect a traditional definition of marriage.
"Ohio must be able to clearly establish and define our own laws rather than have another state or country define something as important as marriage," said Hottinger, a Republican.
Sen. Eric Fingerhut, a Cleveland Democrat, said the bill will hurt Ohio by limiting the ability of businesses and universities to attract talented people.
"If we pass this bill, get up tomorrow and look in the mirror," Fingerhut said. "Smiling back at you is someone who has slowed Ohio's progress by putting up a sign to people that says, 'We don't want you here.'"
The vote came despite opposition by some large companies. Dayton-based NCR Corp. sent a letter to lawmakers Dec. 12 saying the bill could hurt the company's ability to attract and retain employees.
Similar bills have been introduced in each session since Hottinger first introduced the legislation. But former Senate President Richard Finan, a Republican, blocked its passage. He said state law already took care of the matter.
~//~
I guess I can stop writing letters. Nearly four years after I moved here, the asshats have finally won. :(
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 03:06 am (UTC)Never stop fighting sweetie, yer worth too much, the cause is worth too much.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 03:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 03:51 am (UTC)I think when we get some Democratties in the house and when the young, more liberal population takes over eventually, that they'll overturn it, and we'll wonder why the hell this backwards country of ours never had it legal to begin with. Unfortunately, we're being led by old farts who also vote hefty raises for the "good jobs" they're doing that year at the same time laying off thousands of public workers due to lack of money.
no subject
The sad part is: the young, more liberal population (http://www.lib.virginia.edu/speccol/exhibits/sixties/hippies.html) has already taken over. That generation is the most powerful voting lobby out there. Except they're not quite so young and more liberal anymore.
sorry Jude :-/ I'm sure it will change in the future, it's just gonna take time...
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 07:35 am (UTC)Or from the United States, for that matter.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 12:45 pm (UTC)*angry*
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 01:32 pm (UTC)This is what I absolutely do NOT understand. Its a
bill they want to make law that bans same sex
marriages and domestic partner benefits to state
employees and they have the gall to say it doesn't
target homosexuals? Bwa? What bizzaro universe and
logic is that?
It absolutely irritates the crap outta me to see them
try and legislate this. I honestly want to see
polling data on what people think of same sex
marriages and whether or not they feel that it weakens the meaning of marriage. If two people love each other and want to get married, and if the two people happen to be same sex, how does that weaken the meaning of marriage to two heterosexual people?
People think this is a moral issue when it more or
less is a legal one. People, in 90% of the cases,
simply want the same benefits (and same penalties) as
other married couples. The actual bond of marriage,
the...hell, spiritual one, isn't going to be weakened
by the allowance of same sex marriages. If I were
married it wouldn't be an all of a sudden "Holy crap!
My love and commitment to you doesn't mean as much
anymore because Helen and Rita can now get married."
If that bond "weakened" then it wasn't very strong to
begin with. Bah!
The money spent debating this and trying to "enforce"
it could be better spent on something useful like
education. But if we've learned anything from
Republicans, and I only pick on them here because they are the ones sponsering the bill, we've learned the only education worth getting or having is one from a good, Christian private school
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 01:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 03:04 pm (UTC)This is the best out there, and not biased crap like that stuff you see in newspapers. It's from the Pew Trusts.
Religious Beliefs Underpin Opposition to Homosexuality
It's a facinating read. They also asked about views on gay marriage. Basically their study shows that these judgements are being made on purely religious beliefs. There is a difference in beliefs in age, too. There's also some stats tracking acceptance trends since the 70's, and comparing the US to other countries in our views.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 03:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 04:11 pm (UTC)I have a feeling the DOMAs are those laws that are going to be hard to get rid of, because it will need to be a Supreme Court thing, and that won't be happening here any time soon.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 04:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 04:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 04:14 pm (UTC)I'm not a terribly patient person.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 04:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 04:15 pm (UTC)Unfortunately, it's starting to become painfully obvious to me that the majority of the people in this country don't think like we do, not a little, not at all.
*sigh* I feel very defeated today.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 04:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 04:29 pm (UTC)Of course his own marriage is a disgrace. He doesn't have any room to talk if you ask me!
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 05:31 pm (UTC)Not a time to feel defeated
Date: 2004-01-22 05:44 pm (UTC)We were defeated on DOMA because we don't have any political power at the state level. But here in Cleveland, and in Cincinnati (where voters will consider repealing their anti-gay charter amendment in November), the process has started -- person-to-person, neighbor-to-neighbor.
If only we had a list of supporters we could have used to pressure our legislators on DOMA. Why didn't we? It was introduced seven years ago. We didn't because we didn't do the work of building our support.
We can't make the same mistake again. To stop the next anti-gay attack -- and start the process of winning proactive victories like Cleveland Heights, the work must start now.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 06:34 pm (UTC)Call today!
Date: 2004-01-22 10:47 pm (UTC)Call Governor Taft -- 614-466-3555 or 614-644-HELP or Lt. Governor Bradley -- 614-466-3396 or 614-466-3636 and tell the phone operator who answers whether or not you support or oppose the Same-Sex Marriage ban.
Re: Call today...
Date: 2004-01-22 10:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 10:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-23 02:39 am (UTC)Re: Not a time to feel defeated
Date: 2004-01-23 02:42 am (UTC)It's exciting that there is a domestic partner registry in Cleveland Heights, and even more exciting that it was done with canvassing and the popular vote. However, just because a couple is registered as domestic partners in Cleveland Heights doesn't mean much (to me) when the State of Ohio and the Federal Government refuse to recognize such couplings as valid, /and/ when the State of Ohio is in the process of passing a law /denying benefits/ to unmarried partners.
It's like, "Okay, DP registries are good, but what's the point?" Sigh.
no subject
no subject
Date: 2004-01-23 02:47 am (UTC)Still, any show is better than nothing.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-23 03:09 am (UTC)Move out here.
Re: Not a time to feel defeated
Date: 2004-01-23 03:32 am (UTC)It's true that a DP registry in Cleveland Heights doesn't do as much as say, same-sex marriage would. But lots of large employers recognize DP registries for granting employment benefits -- and health insurance is literally a matter of life and death. (And non-residents are allowed to register here.) So lots of people could be helped in a very fundamental way.
Ohio's DOMA (as it pertains to benefits) only affects employees of the State of Ohio.
And as for the elected officials, I see four choices:
(a) Bypass elected officials as was done here, going directly to voters (this can be done at the state level in Ohio also),
(b) Pressure the elected officials already in office to do the right thing,
(c) Vote the bad ones out, vote good ones in,
(d) Do nothing.
The first three options all require lots of grassroots work to be effective, so that's why I say the work needs to start now. The fourth option, of course, doesn't -- but I don't think it's the best choice. :)
no subject
Date: 2004-01-23 03:40 pm (UTC)Re: Not a time to feel defeated
Date: 2004-01-27 07:47 pm (UTC)Ohio's DOMA (as it pertains to benefits) only affects employees of the State of Ohio.
True, but a) the Ohio State University is one of the largest employers in Columbus, and b) some major corporations are already confused about what benefits can be offered and might change their policies. (I hope not, though!)
As far as pressuring the legislators in Ohio, I have been doing my damnedest with Taft in terms of signing this bill... but it seems like the elected officials in Ohio really just don't sit well with me. I don't know how many letters I've sent out in the 4 years I've been here, and I'm getting tired of the same old canned responses.