Colorado and Minnesota lawmakers approve unions for gay couples

Historic votes in Colorado and Minnesota approved civil unions and marriages, respectively, for same-sex couples.

|
Jim Mone/AP
Dr. Paul Melchert, left, gets interrupted by his son, Emmett, at a news conference Feb. 27, in St. Paul, Minn. Behind him, his partner James Zimerman holds Emmett's twin brother, Gabriel. Minnesota lawmakers passed a bill today to legalize gay marriage. A few states to the south, Colorado lawmakers passed a bill to allow civil unions for same-sex couples.

On the same day that the Minnesota House and Senate both passed gay marriage bills along strict party-line votes, Colorado lawmakers took a historic vote to approve civil unions for gay couples. For Colorado legislators, this highlighted a dramatic shift in the political landscape of a state where voters banned same-sex marriage just six years ago.

In both states, the bills will go to the desks of Democratic governors: John Hickenlooper in Colorado and Mark Dayton in Minnesota.

Applause erupted in the Colorado Capitol as the bill won final passage on a 39-26 House vote, with two Republicans joining all Democrats to approve the measure. Several dozen people watching from the House gallery left smiling and hugging, and some wiped away tears of joy.

Once the measure is signed, Colorado will join eight states that have civil unions or similar laws. Nine states and the District of Columbia allow gay marriage now, but that number will rise to ten states when Gov. Dayton signs the Minnesota measure, as he has said he will do.

"This is the best step toward equality Colorado could take right now. I'm thankful we got it done," said Katy Jensen, a 34-year-old Denver engineer who plans a civil union with her partner after the bill becomes law on May 1.

Last year, Colorado's Democratic Sen. Jessie Ulibarri, a gay lawmaker serving his first term, was among those in the House gallery with his children, watching as Republicans used their one-vote majority in the House to prevent the measure from being debated in the waning hours of the session, thus killing the bill.

"I sat with my kids at midnight, wondering what was going to happen the next time we had a tragedy. What would happen if I had to take my kids to the ER and then I was questioned whether or not I was really their dad," said Ulibarri, one of eight gay Democratic lawmakers serving in the Colorado Legislature.

Civil unions for gay couples became a rallying cry for Democrats who took control of the Colorado House in last year's elections, and they vowed an early vote on the proposal.

"Elections have consequences," said Republican Rep. Frank McNulty, the former House speaker.

Democrats now control both chambers of the legislature, and the party elected Colorado's first gay House speaker, Mark Ferrandino.

"The people spoke in November, and we are fulfilling a promise we made at the end of last session," Ferrandino said Tuesday.

The vote marks a dramatic political shift in Colorado, a western state with deep conservative roots that has become more moderate over the past decade. In 1992, Colorado voters approved a ban on municipal antidiscrimination laws to protect gays. Four years later, the U.S. Supreme Court said the law, known as Amendment 2, was unconstitutional, but not before some branded Colorado a "hate state."

And in 2006, voters approved a gay-marriage ban — meaning civil unions are the only option for gay couples in the state for now. That could change with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage bans in the coming months. The court will hear argument on the bans on March 26 and 27, and is expected to issue a ruling by June.

"We truly do stand on the edge of history. For some in this chamber, this is the reason that we are here, at this time, and in this place," said Colorado's Democratic Rep. Pete Lee. He called the vote a time for redemption.

"We vote today to redeem our friends, our aunts, our uncles, our brothers, our sisters, our children, and I daresay, our colleagues, from the scourge of discrimination and inequality," he said.

Colorado's measure grants gay couples rights similar to marriage, including enhanced inheritance and parental rights. People in civil unions also would have the ability to make medical decisions for their partners.

Republicans opposed the bill, saying they would've liked to see religious exemptions to provide legal protections for those opposed to civil unions.

"I have long-standing concerns about the way in which religion isn't tolerated by some down here at the state Capitol," McNulty said. "I continue to have those concerns."

Democrats contend the Republican suggestions to amend the bill would have opened the door to discrimination. Under the bill, churches are not required to perform civil unions, but Republicans wanted broader protections to include businesses and adoption agencies.

Republicans also argued civil unions were too similar to marriage, and that they would undermine the institution of marriage.

"Civil unions are not marriage. They are something that are separate, and distinct, and lesser, and unequal," Democratic Sen. Pat Steadman said. "And that really is not good enough. We passed this bill because this is the best we can do."

When asked, five of the eight gay Democratic lawmakers said after the vote that they would get civil unions. It was a difficult question for Steadman, whose longtime partner, Dave Misner, died of cancer last year.

"Some of us don't get that opportunity," Steadman said.

Associated Press writer Kristen Wyatt contributed to this report.

___

Read the bill: http://goo.gl/QOEjH

___

Find Ivan Moreno on Twitter: http://twitter.com/IvanJourno

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Colorado and Minnesota lawmakers approve unions for gay couples
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2013/0312/Colorado-and-Minnesota-lawmakers-approve-unions-for-gay-couples
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe