Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Colorado Senate approves gay civil unions

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Well done Colorado.

    Gay couples are now no longer invisible in Colorado.

    Now they are officially 2nd class citizens.

    I know this is progress but these civil partnership apartheid regimes truly are offensive.

    1. Don’t count your chickens, the lower house of Colorado’s state government has yet to vote and the Rpublicans have a majority of 1 in there. For it to succeed, every Democrat will have to vote in favour and at least one Republican will have to switch sides. So there’s no certainty that this is going to pass. The governor has said that he will sign the bill into law if it gets to him but that’s a big if.

      In terms of marriage, Colorado has a constitutional ban on gay marriage. Until that gets overturned either by the courts or by another vote then this is the best they could do.

    2. Not unlike the UK, eh?

  2. Jock S. Trap 25 Mar 2011, 10:59am

    A positive step, though equal right even in marriage should be routine.

    I do think that this helps when you have people from the LGBT represented in positions that people have to take note of, weither it be political, religious or whatever. A visible presents, someone people get to know does make a huge difference.

    1. @Jock S Trap

      In all areas of life, in order to achieve proper and full LGBT rights – this is most often best achieved by having LGBT people of influence within the sphere we are trying to influence be that politics, law or whatever

      I have slight mixed feelings on the marriage question. I do agree LGBT people should have the right to marry if that is their choice, but equally straight couples should have the right to civil partnership …

  3. This will do what civil partnerships have done, pave the way for full marriage equality, once the ban on same-sex marriage is eventually overturned, state by state. In the U.S., its going to be far harder to get marriage equality in all states as a result of the state government system where marriage equality and civil union laws can be overturned on referenda in states that allow it. Look what happened in California and Maine. Thank goodness we don’t have that form of government in the UK. Nobody’s rights should be put to referenda, ever.

    1. @Robert

      hear hear

      1. For me you might have a referendum on issues of conscience but not on matters which impact on rights of individuals

        A matter of conscience misused can prevent others having rights. Having rights does not prevent someone having a conscience.

  4. Charles Bayliss 25 Mar 2011, 2:36pm

    @ Stu

    You might be right taht we need gay people were it matters most. But these gay people have to have hard b…s an d not wet there pants. Here in Malta, we have had a gay MP on the government side for almost two years but he never spoke on gay rights in parliament, not even for just 1 minute.

    1. @ Charles

      I think its incredibly helpful to have LGBT people in places of influence. It not only acts as a sphere of influence but also helps demonstrate the normality of LGBT people.

      I think there are three types of gay politician, lawmaker, judge, journalist etc etc …
      1) The gay politician – where LGBT issues are one of the major issues they discuss and seek to develop. In some cases almost an activist.
      2) The politician who happens to be gay. Where they represent their entire electorate and are much more comfortable dealing with economics, justice, defence etc etc but are happy to stand up and be counted on LGBT issues and pay it more than lip service/
      3) The politician who might as well be closeted. They don’t even pay lip service to LGBT issues and appear to be in politics or whatever more for their own advancement that for any sense of representing their electorate etc.

  5. Stu, well said! Individuals’ rights should never be put to referenda. The conscience issue I don’t have a problem with as long as it doesn’t infringe on our rights or theye try to deny us the rights that the rest of society has.

    What I have a serious problem with is the religious cults who oppose same-sex marriage when we’re not even demanding a religious ceremony nor demanding that they should recognise same-sex marriages, let alone officiate at them. None of the ten countries which have marriage equality require them to and in fact they have gender neutral civil marriage laws and so will the UK once the law is changed. The established cult among others have to realise that civil marriage is not their domain, nor do they own it.

    1. @Robert

      Absolutely – they have an entitlement to views on marriage, particularly religious ceremonies. What they are not entitled to is to declare that they are the source of all wisdom on all forms of marriage – they are not. Neither can they deny access to marriage for those LGBT people who wish to have it. It gets tricky when you get to the point of conscience on permitting religious ceremonies for same sex marriages. That is more complex. However, the fundamental points of entitlement to same sex marriages not being damaging to the consciences of some people of faith is clear – ensuring LGBT peoples rights are upheld does not prevent people of faith being able to have a conscience.

  6. Thank God, yes there are LGBT Christians who know that God is a God of love and because we work with the positive side of religion we will go to heaven because haters work for satan and, well we know where they go.

    1. Absolutely there are LGBT Christians and they make our diverse world a more interesting place

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all