Updated Nov 6, 2009 - 5:50 pm

Gay partnership measure approved by voters

Comments   |   Print this   |   E-mail this   |  

Zoom

Related Links:

• Approve Referendum 71 campaign maintains lead
  
• Complete elections news and results
  

Washington state voters have approved the state's new "everything but marriage" law, marking a significant expansion of rights for gay couples who are registered as domestic partners.

National gay-rights groups say the passage of Referendum 71 marks the first time a state's voters have approved a gay equality measure at the ballot box.

With the latest election results Friday, R-71 maintained its lead of 52 percent to 48 percent.

The measure asked voters to approve or reject the latest expansion of the state's domestic partnership law, granting registered domestic partners additional state rights previously given only to married couples.

Full-fledged gay marriage is still not allowed under Washington law.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

• Add A Comment
  
  
  0
  0
• len98531 wrote...

  hey

  If you dont like the idea of having a gay partnership, dont have one.noone has made a logical argument yet, of how a gay relationship is evil and will cause the downfall of society, at least not without evoking the bible. your rights end where mine begin, just as mine end where yours begin. it would be nice if that simple thought was still taught in civics class, or whatever they call it now...

  November 6, 2009 12:42 pm

  121266

  0

  0 Report this as abuse
• islandlisa wrote...

  Discrimination is Real

  To those posting here who say gay and lesbian people are not discriminated against at hospitals, in housing and in jobs: I work in an attorney's office and we see this discrimination ALL THE TIME. We worked on one estate where one of a couple who had been life-long partners died and the surviving partner had to fight her partners family over the home they had owned together for over 2o years. If they had been given the legal protection of marriage, then the family would have had no legal ground to stand on. And we hear stories all the time from our clients about being shoved out of hospital rooms of their partners by homophobic family members who deny them access to their partners in emergency situations when the patient does not always have the time to conveniently fill out some form listing who can visit them. My own brother is gay, has been with his partner for 22 years (longer than my husband and I were married) and his partner has left him everything in his will. The family has already told my brother they are going to fight him on the grounds he is not "family". My brother, who lives quietly in a small town community, has decided to not even fight them when the day comes. These travesties of justice happen every day and if you accept our constitutional separation of church and state these practices are indefensible. I am a Christian and hate has no place in the teachings of the Jesus I worship. If you want to live in a "theocracy" move to Iran, and good luck with that!

  November 6, 2009 12:43 pm

  121268

  0

  0 Report this as abuse
• wsualumn wrote...

  Islandlisa

  Thanks for your input! You conveyed your mesage with real life tragedies. My parents used to be pretty irrational in their thinking at one time. They believed all of the old stories as to why people are gay and that they must be flawed. Once they got to know my gay neighbors(the first gays that they ever knew), their attitude changed for the better. They now don't see any big deal about it. This happened when they were 75 years of age.

  November 6, 2009 1:19 pm

  121288

  0

  0 Report this as abuse
• SeattleNative wrote...

  islandlisa

  I guess we'll all have to take your word that the examples you present are true. That's what contracts are for.

  November 6, 2009 3:19 pm

  121364

  0

  0 Report this as abuse
• SeattleNative wrote...

  And by the way...

  ...in the State of Washington, registered domestic partners already had hospital visitation rights before this law was enacted. So that argument...such as was presented in the pro R-71 tv ads...is fallacious.

  November 6, 2009 3:22 pm

  121366

  0

  0 Report this as abuse
• Rick (4) wrote...

  SeattleNative

  As you said, Jesus preached"to love your neighbor as yourself". He did NOT preach"to love your neighbor as yourself unless they are gay".

  November 6, 2009 3:39 pm

  121384

  0

  0 Report this as abuse
• wsualumn wrote...

  Seattle Hative, Opps I Mean Native

  Hospital visitations may have been fine, but under what circumstances? You are looking for all sorts of holes. Just a few years ago, a woman was not allowed into the hospital, as her companion was dying. That is no lie. Sorry, I can't provide a video when it happened. You are just going to have to get over this new law. If it bothers you too much, there are no borders keeping you here.

  November 6, 2009 3:42 pm

  121387

  0

  0 Report this as abuse
• wsualumn wrote...

  Everett Gal

  I love your posts as well! It's nice to see that there are some people on here that actually care about people being treated fairly and not having to resort to the fear of illogic and the fear of God.

  November 6, 2009 4:05 pm

  121397

  0

  0 Report this as abuse
• sp5937 wrote...

  RE: SiCoFgOvErNmEnT

  I am an idiot? Because I do not see your viewpoint as you do? Too bad you feel that way. I at least KNOW why I feel the way I do, you are just saying that because it riles your thinking. I truly wish all homosexuals would disappear. You probably don't like that do you? But I don't care, nothing in this life makes me more sick that queers. Except maybe, queers pushing their crap down our throats as an agenda to get protected species rights...like some endangered animal!! Well, I would say they are an endangered animal, except that more and more foolish people choose to live that lifestyle.

  November 6, 2009 4:14 pm

  121402

  0

  0 Report this as abuse
• SeattleNative wrote...

  There is a major difference...

  ...between loving the person and condoning their actions. Hence Jesus' call for us to minister to the imprisoned. You can love the person, but still denounce their crime.

  wsualumn, that's the exact fallacious TV ad I mentioned. In 2007, Washington State enacted a law that provides hospital visitation rights to registered domestic partners. For some reason, the TV ad left that part out. Couldn't have been in an effort to deceive the voters, could it?

  November 6, 2009 4:22 pm

  121409

  0

  0 Report this as abuse
• 14691

  Report this as abuse

• < prev
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• next >

• Mike McGinn claims victory in Seattle mayor's race
• Gay partnership measure approved by voters
• Washington senator declares victory in R-71 campaign
• Approve Referendum 71 campaign maintains lead
• McGinn widens lead in Seattle's mayoral race
• Michael Medved: A conservative's take on Washington's election
• Mayors races in Tacoma, Vancouver, Bremerton
• Eyman admits defeat on I-1033
• Carr concedes race for Seattle City Attorney
• Councilman Constantine wins King Co Executive race