By
Various
October 28, 2009
Protecting individuals and their families is the most important reason for approving Referendum 71 in the upcoming election in Washington state.
Other Daily Election '09 Endorsements
Seattle mayor: Mike McGinn
I-1033: 'No'
King County executive: Dow Constantine
As written into the title of this bill, it “would expand the rights, responsibilities and obligations accorded state-registered same-sex and senior domestic partners to be equivalent to those of married spouses, except that a domestic partnership is not a marriage.” Voters are voting on whether to approve or reject the bill passed earlier this year and signed into law by Gov. Chris Gregoire.
The Daily editorial board strongly recommends voters approve Referendum 71 to extend the rights of married couples to those of state-registered domestic partners. If approved, the referendum would offer legal protection for same-sex or senior domestic partners as well as their families.
We approve this referendum in support of the powers, rights and responsibilities of state-registered partners afforded by this bill, including “the ability to use available sick leave to care for a domestic partner … rights under insurance policies that accrue as a matter of law after the death of a spouse … rights and responsibilities related to adoption, child custody and child support,” as stated in the explanatory statement of Referendum 71.
All families should be offered the same rights, regardless of the sexual orientation of the primary guardians, in regard to financial and emotional support. Couples should be allowed to support one another financially, physically and emotionally when in a committed relationship. This referendum would allow state-registered domestic partnerships to do so by allowing individuals to visit ill partners in the hospital, allow care to be offered to families in the event of injury or death of a primary provider, and the ability to permit consent for health care for a patient who is not able to do so for him- or herself.
Although those opposed to the referendum see this as one last step toward same-sex marriage in Washington state, the bill clearly states, “a domestic partnership is not a marriage.” People opposed to the bill also fear this will make same-sex domestic partnerships become a socially acceptable family unit. Even though those speaking against Referendum 71 see this as a negative, The Daily editorial board sees this as a positive possible outcome.
Acceptance of diversity is at the heart of this measure. Vote to approve Referendum 71 in support of Washington families.
This is the opinion of The Daily’s editorial board: Editor-in-Chief Casey Smith, Production Director Colleen Kirsten, Opinion Editor Allen Wagner, Lifestyles Editor Rachel Solomon, and Webcast Manager Maks Goldenshteyn. The Daily’s editorial board will be making more recommendations concerning Seattle mayor tomorrow; I-1033 on Monday, Nov. 2; and King County executive on Tuesday, Nov. 3. Our final election board meetings will be tomorrow at 5 p.m. and Sunday, Nov. 1, at 5 p.m and are open to students.
The last day to send in or drop off your ballot is Nov. 3. Be sure to send it to the proper authorities in time.
9 Comments
#1 lastyearsghosts
on October 28, 2009 at 10:55 a.m.(Everett, WA | Unverified Name)
I see the Daily is finally eating its words after its little fiasco last year regarding an editorial about GBLTQ people.
#2 Vicky C.
on October 28, 2009 at 1:33 p.m.(Redmond, WA)
@comment1: surprise surprise, the daily is composed of people who have diverse opinions. and it actually has people write on both sides instead of being just anti homosexual or pro gbltq (however many letters you are going to add to that ridiculous abbreviation). so don't get too smug there mister.
#3 The LGBT Civil Rights Movement
on October 28, 2009 at 2:01 p.m.(Portland, OR | Unverified Name)
Vicky, don't get too smug yourself. Why would any newspaper worth its weight be proud of the fact that it publishes homophobic pieces? That's nothing to be proud of. I'm proud of the fact that the UW Daily was PUT IN ITS PLACE by students and that its position on equality was challenged and that activist students have been able to shift the Daily's editorial policy to a more progressive position. Activism works. There aren't "two sides" to the issue of equality. Either you support equality for all or you don't. In our society, people who don't believe everyone should be treated equally under the law are considered whacko. There are no "two sides" to oppression. You are either for racism or against racism. You are either for sexism or against sexism. And you are either for homophobia/heterosexism or you are against them.
#4 Lonnie
on October 28, 2009 at 2:05 p.m.(Portland, OR | Unverified Name)
Sherry Wolf Speaks: We’ve Only Just Begun to Fight
What’s Next for the LGBT Civil Rights Movement
LGBT Equality Panel and Rally featuring Sherry Wolf
7:00 pm, November 7, 2009
University of Washington, Sieg Hall, Room 134
LGBT Equality Panel and Rally: $5
Sexuality and Socialism
10:30 am, November 8, 2009
University of Washington, Thomson Hall
Single Conference Session: $5
Entire conference is $20-50 sliding scale, Pre-Register online at nwsocialistconference.org or at any ISO meeting or event.
Fresh from the National Equality March in Washington, DC, activist and author Sherry Wolf will be speaking twice at the University of Washington in Seattle as part of the Northwest Socialist Conference, organized by the International Socialist Organization.
On Saturday, November 7, at 7pm, she will be the keynote speaker on a panel entitled "We've Only Just Begun to Fight: What's Next for the LGBT Civil Rights Movement?" along with Seattle lgbt activist Lonnie Lopez and Portland lgbt activist Camille Avian-White. On Sunday, November 8, at 10.30am, she will be giving a talk on her recently published book "Sexuality and Socialism: The History, Politics, and Theory of LGBT Liberation." For more info and to get tickets, visit http://nwsocialistconference.org.
Sherry Wolf is the author of Sexuality and Socialism (Haymarket 2009), associate editor of the International Socialist Review and a National Equality March speaker and Steering Committee member. She is a leading member of the International Socialist Organization. Wolf is an associate editor of the International Socialist Review and has written for Alternet, Znet, Counterpunch, DissidentVoice, MrZine, New Politics, Socialist Worker, and many other progressive publications and Web sites. She is a popular public speaker on campuses nationwide and has appeared on radio shows from Pacifica’s Democracy Now! to NPR-affiliate KALW’s Your Call. Wolf is a long-time social justice activist since her student days in the anti-apartheid campus divestment movement through to today’s struggle for equal marriage rights. She graduated from Northwestern University with honors in Philosophy, yet adamantly agrees with Karl Marx: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.”
Cleve Jones, Sherry Wolf, and the Cast of Hair at the National Equality March:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2Vtp2...
Sponsored by International Socialist Organization Seattle and Portland branches, Socialist Worker, Haymarket Books and the International Socialist Review
For local information please contact nwconference@seattleiso.org or click seattleiso.org or portlandsocialists.org to connect with your local ISO branch.
#5 Rebecca_F
on October 28, 2009 at 2:48 p.m.(Denver, CO)
In response to #3:
You should read what you write.
"There aren't 'two sides' to the issue of equality. Either you support equality for all or you don't. . . . There are no 'two sides' to oppression. You are either for racism or against racism. You are either for sexism or against sexism. And you are either for homophobia/heterosexism or you are against them."
In other words, there aren't two sides, there are TWO sides. And if anything sounds wacko, it's your double-speak.
#6 Mario L.
on October 28, 2009 at 3 p.m.(UW Campus)
We should work with the Daily, to further the advancement of all people, and to ensure that that we cultivate the community we ought to be.
For what it is, and what the journalists have done to write about the movement, I am proud.
This is more of a challenge for us to continue working toward our goals and to keep our vision of equality and liberty in sharp focus.
Thank you for endorsing Ref. 71, the Daily editorial board. This helps, and boosts the morale of student activists on campus!
;D
#7 lastyearsghosts
on October 28, 2009 at 3:42 p.m.(Everett, WA | Unverified Name)
WORD, #3. Speak the truth.
Rebecca, #3 is implying that being against equality is not a sensible stance to such an extent that it is not a reasonable, rational choice. If you choose it, you are choosing something that isn't right, fair, or based in justice, ethics or the law.
If there are two sides, one seems so painfully weak such that the choice is obvious to those who are not filled with irrational homophobia and hate.
#8 Concerned Alumni
on October 28, 2009 at 5:19 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
@Vicky C
Your comment regarding the acronym GLBTQ "however many letters you are going to add to that ridiculous abbreviation" is hurtful, ill-informed, and downright disrespctful.
GLBTQ is not an abbreviation. It is an acronym that stands for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer/Questioning (this varies depending on who is using it. Yes, there are a lot of letters, but in our society, any body that is differently oriented has been lumped into this Acronym, so it continues to expand as peoples identities are never just one 'letter'.
Variations on this include LGBTQQAITs
(Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Queer, Questioning, Ally,Intersex, Two Spirit)
We're here, we're queer. Get over it.
#9 Vicky C.
on October 28, 2009 at 5:37 p.m.(Redmond, WA)
"I'm proud of the fact that the UW Daily was PUT IN ITS PLACE by students and that its position on equality was challenged and that activist students have been able to shift the Daily's editorial policy to a more progressive position."
you're conflating the position of a columnist with the position of the editors. the purpose of an opinion page is NOT for all the writers to take the same stance on an issue, which is why newspaper editors routinely publish op eds they may or may not agree with. so that entire pompous paragraph trumpeting how great you are is meaningless. for all you know, the editors may have always been in favor of your agenda, and therefore your actions mean nothing.
you people remind me of the anti-abortionists. "a baby is a life, and everyone who says otherwise is advocating infanticide."
"homosexuality should be treated the same as heterosexuality and everyone who says otherwise is an oppressive bigot."
in fact, i voted for r-71, despite the crusading absolutist rhetoric issuing from people such as yourselves. i don't have anything against gay people, only the radical elements of the gay movement that labels everyone who disagrees with them as "enemies" and spams slogans and acronyms as if that would persuade anyone.
r-71 is a sensible moderate approach, but i could't say the same about many of its supporters.
Post a comment