The "Everything But Marriage" Bill

Here's two things I wouldn't have believed 10 years ago:

1. That six U.S. states would allow same-sex marriage.

2. That one of those states wouldn't be Washington (or Oregon, or even California for Pete's sake)!

Ever the pessimist, I would point out that even married same-sex couples do not enjoy the same rights at the federal level as opposite-sex couples (such as social security benefits, military family health benefits, or federal retirement benefits).

All the same, I'm impressed. And I was glad our State legislature passed the "Domestic Partnership Expansion Bill" of 2009.

Washington created a same-sex domestic partnership registry in 2007. The system was tweaked in 2008, and the 2009 legislation seeks to fill in gaps such as disability insurance and public retirement systems by expanding the Washington Code's definition of "spouse," "husband," "wife," "widow," and so forth to include domestic partners. See Senate Bill 5688 and "Washington Expands Domestic Partnership Law," Gay and Lesbian Times, May 21, 2009.

Expanding the legal definition of "spouse" is an efficient way to expand whatever equal protection as Washington law can give to same-sex registered domestic partners. From an attorney's perspective, it would be even more efficient just to allow same-sex couples to marry, but this fight has never been about efficiency. Never has been, and still isn't.

The new expanded definition is scheduled to take effect on July 26, 2009, and already there is a petition for a ballot measure repealing the 2009 act. See "Referendum 71 filing today to repeal new rights of same-sex partners," The Olympian, May 4, 2009.

This debate is stirring up some ugly reactions in our lovely state. Some supporters of SB 5688 plan to create a searchable database of names and addresses of those who sign the petition for Referendum 71. See "Gay-rights Group Wants to Name Petition Signers," Seattle Times, June 2, 2009.

I support same-sex marriage. I think our two-tiered legal system is unfair, cumbersome and costly. The domestic partnership registry is not the equivalent of marriage, but it is a start. Nevertheless, the tactic of posting names and addresses of gay-rights opponents is untenable. It invites harassment, and it reminds me of the "death list" posted by anti-abortion activists down in Portland a few years ago (Remember that? If you don't, see this 1999 article).

I want to be proud of Washington. I hope people will let the ideas speak for themselves.

As always, this post is not intended to be legal advice.