Thursday, March 17, 2005

LBGT: MI Attorney general says Proposal 2 bars future same-sex benefits

Republican hatemongering much?

In the first legal interpretation of Proposal 2, Attorney General Mike Cox wrote in an opinion that Kalamazoo's policy of offering health and retirement benefits to same-sex partners violates the amendment. Voters passed the measure 59 percent to 41 percent in November.

Proposal 2 said a union between one man and one woman "shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose."

Kalamazoo's policy gives domestic partnerships a "marriage-like" status, Cox said. Given the constitutional amendment's broad language, conferring benefits recognizes the validity of same-sex relationships, he ruled.

1 comment:

Steve said...

Those who were pushing Proposal Two said multiple times that they this bill would not attempt to get rid of partner benefits and the like. This type of tactic/slippery slope is becoming all too common in politics - pull the wool over voters eyes on an issue (gay marriage, immigration in Arizona, partial-birth abortion ban) and tell them this law will not affect other related aspects (partner benefits and adoption rights (Proposal 2), access to city services like the polic and fire department (AZ immmigration law)).