Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Victory in the fight for a right

When the state legislature voted in favor of civil unions in the spring of 2005, I was there -- as an intern. I was interning at the Capitol with the Journal Inquirer, and at that time, I really had no idea just how historic one of my assignments would be.

As lawmakers in the Senate debated legalizing civil unions, I remember sitting in the chamber frantically scribbling down notes. I distinctly remember the lawmakers going back and forth about the definition of marriage, and I remember Sen. Andrew McDonald rising to tell his colleagues that the civil union legislation did not threaten the religious institution of marriage.

But despite the passage of the bill, several lawmakers were still fearful. They were wondering what was next.

Sen. John Kissel is a good example. Like many Republicans, including Governor Rell, he said he believed marriage should be limited to one man and one woman. He also said the effort over the years to legalize same-sex marriage showed that civil unions were just one more step toward that goal.

The latter part of his statement proved to be true. Thanks to the state Supreme Court, same-sex couples in Connecticut can get marriage licenses beginning today.

It's a ruling that has received national attention, and the hype could validate another one of Kissel's predictions. If same-sex marriage is legalized in Connecticut, advocates will use the state as a springboard to launch a national issue, Kissel said in 2005.

Personally, I'm anxious to see how the nation will react. The issue of same-sex marriage has been hotly debated and many are passionate about the matter. Change takes time, and I'm guessing that it will be a little while before other states follow Connecticut's lead.

Do note that Connecticut and Massachusetts are the only states that allow same-sex marriage.

In the end, I guess the questions we ask today are the same questions that have been discussed for years. Should same-sex couples be allowed to marry, and why should they have to fight for a right that many take for granted?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Because it is a lifestyle issue not a legal or religious issue. If society honors gay wants, then the needs of these very same people will be ignored.
A moral issue of procreation will be stuffed in the closet to replace the emptiness of such a union.