May 18, 2009 in News

Gregoire signs ‘everything but marriage’ law

Grants domestic partners most of rights and responsiblities of spouses

• Print
• Email
• Share

Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire on Monday signed a bill granting domestic partners, including same-sex couples, most of the state rights and responsibilities of married couples.
(Full-size photo)

By Richard Roesler

Staff writer

SEATTLE _ In a victory for same-sex partners _ and a starting gun for social conservatives intent on a repeal _ Gov. Chris Gregoire on Monday signed into law a bill granting domestic partners most of the rights of spouses.

“They will make for stronger families, and when we have stronger families, we have a stronger Washington state,” Gregoire said.

Proponents, crowded into a Seattle community center, called it the right thing to do. The change offers more protection, such as public pension benefits, for domestic partners and their children.

The bill’s relatively easy passage this year was sharp difference from just a few years ago, when lawmakers battled furiously over gay rights legislation. Proponents of same-sex marriage see that as a promising sign that Washington will join states like Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa in letting gay and lesbian couples marry.

“Today signifies a promise kept, but it also signifies a promise we have to keep,” state Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, told the bill-signing crowd.

Church groups and conservative lawmakers are vowing to overturn the law. They’ve filed a statewide referendum on it. If they can gather the more than 120,000 signatures required by late July, the law will be suspended at least until it goes on the November ballot for voters to decide.

“At the founding of our country, we made a conscious decision to promote marriage above all other legal unions, because of the inherent value of raising children in a home with a mom and a dad,” said state Rep. Matt Shea, R-Mead. He’s one of several legislators backing Referendum 71, which would overturn the law.

Only a male and a female can create a child, he said. And it’s better for children, he says, to have both a father and a mother.

“I think males and females bring unique traits to a relationship,” he said.

For proponents, the law is a simple matter of fairness.

“It’s a good next step,” said Spokane’s Kyla Bates, a domestic partner with her partner of 22 years, Lori Rodriguez. They have a 7-year-old daughter. “Obviously, I would prefer marriage and all the legal ramifications that go along with it.”

Six years ago in Oregon, the couple found out what it’s like to lack such protections. The couple and their then-infant daughter were in a car wreck.

It was the kind of thing for which they’d prepared, spending thousands of dollars on legal paperwork to ensure that they would be able to make medical decisions for each other.

But “at the hospital, they wouldn’t let me in the emergency room with either one of them, because I didn’t have the documentation with me,” said Bates. “For us, it was a huge wakeup call.”

Washington lawmakers in 2007 approved domestic partnerships, granting hospital visitation, funeral decisions and some inheritance rights to couples who register. Same-sex couples are eligible, as are senior citizen heterosexual couples.

A year ago, when Bates and Rodriguez’s daughter was hospitalized again, things were different. Staffers treated them as two moms, with the rights to be there and make decisions for their daughter.

When their daughter was a baby, the couple worried about how the girl would be treated by playmates’ families, whether she and they would be accepted. They were pleasantly surprised. There’s never been even a hint of a problem, Bates said. Their friends and neighbors are very supportive.

“We’re a family, they’re a family,” she said.

Bates thinks that same-sex marriage is inevitable. Society as a whole isn’t quite ready for it, she said, but she believes Washington is.

She’s appalled at Referendum 71.

“I think it’s insane,” she said. “The people that think it will hurt them for us to have the same rights as them, I don’t understand their thinking. It has no impact on them whatsoever.”

Gregoire suggested Monday that she would campaign against the proposed referendum. It’s time, she said, for Washingtonians “to say we stand for justice and we stand for shared responsibility to one another. Today is that day.”

She predicted the measure, if it gets on the ballot, will fail. She said it’s time to be rid of the “unsettling notion” that some loving, devoted families don’t deserve the same rights as others.

“Going back is not an option for the people of the state of Washington,” she said.

Richard Roesler can be reached at (360) 664-2598 or at richr@spokesman.com. Read more news from Olympia at the Eye on Olympia blog.

• Story
• Photos 01
• Comments 06

Six comments on this story so far. Add yours!

• 

  southie4573 on May 18 at 2:41 p.m.

  Yes for WA State. Oh wait - here comes the biggoted religious freaks - who think that two guys marrying effect their lives.

  Flag as inappropriate

• 

  DocTom on May 18 at 6:11 p.m.

  Oh southie4573, not to worry, we won't be here that much longer to bother you. The really great part of it remains that we live eternally in the Kingdom. Sad you won't be there with us.

  Flag as inappropriate

• 

  Nick42 on May 18 at 6:59 p.m.

  DocTom, when are you guys leaving already? Seriously. You have all been talking about it for so long now. Can you at least give me an estimate so I will know when I can move into your house? My lease is almost up.

  Flag as inappropriate

• 

  davidthewhat on May 18 at 10:46 p.m.

  Nick42, how humorous is eternal damnation to you? The eternal darkness of a Godless and loveless existence of perpetual torment and suffering in a eternally hopeless and helpless environment of damnation sound humorous to you? Real funny isn't it?

  Flag as inappropriate

• 

  FelineMagic on May 19 at 7:42 a.m.

  Separation of church and state. My religion has recognized all types of relationships for centuries. Why can't our government? This is a wonderful step towards equality for those who are only tolerated as a bad joke.

  Christians: gay marriage will NOT redefine the religious definition of marriage. After all, I am to believe that God's laws are stronger than human's laws, right? This step will be giving gays the rights to visit their loved ones in hospitals, share health insurance, give property rights, and other government granted benefits. The government should NEVER be able to tell us who we can and can't trust, love, honor, and live our lives with.

  Flag as inappropriate

• 

  Megan_B on May 19 at 8:24 a.m.

  Read Jeremiah chapter 10. It will tell you not to put up Christmas trees. How many Christians do this every year? Just about all. But they still believe they should be granted into the Kingdom. And they shall. Just not the ones who play God and feel it is their place to judge others… say, the gays who want to share the same legal rights as everyone else. It's too bad that many god-fearing and Christ-worshiping homosexuals are turned away from their faith, by force, because they are regarded as outsiders by the group they want to be a part of. Why is it the religious fanatics feel they need to uphold some minor regulations spelled out in the old testament, such as a man lying with another man, versus others (having a Christmas tree?) My personal philosophy is two things: love God more than yourself, and love everyone else as much as yourself. you do those two things, and everything else will fall into place. By loving everyone else as much as yourself, wouldn't you want everyone to have the same opportunities you get to have? I just have a hard time believing that these fanatics think they are actually doing good for themselves and their faith. Maybe they need to stop and ask, “What would Jesus do?” I think I have an idea… and it doesn't involve hate towards others.

  Flag as inappropriate