Washington State Bill Would Dramatically Expand Domestic Partnership Rights

All of you from the E. Coast and CA who look down your noses at WA state as you mention "separate but equal", get over it! Look at your own states and see what rights that you have , or what LITTLE rights you have. If your politicians can do better for you then bring it on! I love the state of WA and proud of it. So stop being a hater!

All of you bitter queens from the E. Coast and CA who look down your noses at WA state as you mention "separate but equal", get over it! Look at your own states and see what rights that you have , or what LITTLE rights you have. If your politicians can do better for you then bring it on! I love the state of WA and proud of it. So stop being a hater!

In response to Tia, WA state does not require companies to offer health insurance to domestic partners. I work at a health insurance company and I point out the blatant discrimination every chance I get. We offer domestic partnership benefits to our customers but not to our own employees. HR always tells me that it would be too difficult and expensive to do. I think that this new bill that Sen. Murray put in would would require this though so I am crossing my fingers. If they aren't willing to do the right thing on their own...then we will need a shove in the right direction.

Where do I find out if my company is required to offer these benefits for my partner if I live in Vancouver, WA? Thanks!

Yes, yes, we get that it's "separate but equal", congratulations, you know your history. Not only have they already started a full marriage measure, the people behind both have said that while they don't expect that measure to go anywhere this year, they will keep trying, and further expanding the partner benefits in no way prevents them from eventually changing them to full "marriage". In fact, it's one step forward towards the goal, which I believe is sometimes referred to as "progress", though I could be wrong and the term may have changed since it's been used last. I will happily take my rights and wait to get the title, rather than demand that if I don't get it called marriage RIGHT NOW then I don't want anything at all. It seems to me that in the past groups of people have gone through "separate but equal" stages before gaining "full" rights, but maybe people don't know their history and just know the phrase.

What we really need is to remove the Washington Supremes that came from the southern theology of Separate but Equal. We need to say NO to the white good old boys and the Uncle C. Thomas, who wants to drag the GLBT community chained to the equal right buss until we give up or dead. When is Washington’s GLBT going to stand up like adults and hold our representatives responsible? I don’t believe it when I hear one of our closeted GLBT voting for some like congressmen David Reichert (GOP). I know they don’t believe that they should be treated as first class citizen. I know they don’t believe they should have the right of marriage as their straight counter parts do. When are we going to demand the East Side Closet Queens to get out of their second hand closets? I also know that the GLBT who supported the GOP are bankrupt, more ways then one. So when do finely get a clue and demand our full rights, which include Marriage? When Haggard and Moorehead (1998) finely admits their really gay?

Personally, I don't care if they call it "Eww, Yuck, Guys (or Gals) Together" as long as I get every benefit that my married siblings get. End of story. Marriage is just a label. So if I have to get 'Eww, Yuck'ed, so be it as long as I can supercede my partners parents in an emergency setting, or be secure in the thought that he won't be put out of our house by a distant cousin if anything happens to me.

While "separate but equal" is appalling from a constitutional perspective, please remember that real families receive substantial benefits when the rights of marriage are conferred. While this important argument is justifiably about theoretical rights, it's also about community property, inheritance rights, child adoption, spousal support, dissolution of property in the event of a "divorce" and dozens of other practical needs of couples. California's passage of Domestic Partnership legislation provided important protections for my family, including the surety that children born were legally ours. The couples of Washington deserve these protections as well. They can continue to fight for whatever label they deem appropriate.

Seperate - but equal? Civil unions are OK for us second-hand citizens? OK FINE! Let me pay my taxes with monopoly money. I mean - it LOOKS like money and so it's the same, right?

BIG BABY STEPS...IT'S A GOOD THING! AND THANKYOU TO MARK FOR TESTIFYING BEFORE THE LAWMAKERS! I AM 15 MINUTES NEXT DOOR IN IDAHO, MY MATE IS IN THE PHILIPPINES. IMAGINE HOW BADLY WE WANT CHANGE! WE JUST CELEBRATED OUR EIGHTH ANNIVERSARY.