Virginias New Anti Gay Law Open To Bias

[Lee]

RICHMOND, Va. -- The law is short, only 70 words long. But the newly passed amendment to Virginia's Affirmation of Marriage Act has caused an uproar among gays and lesbians who are unsure how it will affect them when it takes effect July 1.

One woman at a recent forum to discuss the law wondered if it would nullify the joint custody arrangement she and her partner have for their child. "If my partner dies and her family challenges it, will that affect me?" she asked.

Another man from a conservative Richmond suburb asked whether the law was written vaguely to leave each case up to the "discretion and bias" of the judge. "In that case," he said, "I've got to get out of Henrico County quickly."

The law prohibits a civil union, partnership contract or "other arrangement between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage." It does not define what types of arrangements it would cover, leaving many legal experts with conflicting opinions.

Arthur Leonard, a New York Law School professor who specializes in gay rights, said the law could apply retroactively to any legal contract same-sex couples have signed.

Rebecca Glenberg, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union in Virginia, believes the law can be interpreted in two ways. If it's read to protect exclusive rights accorded to married couples, such as filing joint federal income tax returns or immunity from testifying against a spouse, gays and lesbians would largely be unaffected because they don't have these rights now.

However, Glenberg said a broader interpretation could include any legal arrangment that married couples are allowed to enter into, such as powers of attorney, property arrangments, wills and medical directives.

"It is not only evil and horrible, it's impossible to tell what this thing means," she said.

The law's author, Del. Robert Marshall, disputes this, saying the original draft of his bill specifically stated that non-exclusive rights of marriage would continue to be legal for same-sex couples. He said concerns over the legitimacy of different types of contracts under the law are "completely fabricated to sow doubt about the statute."

"It is not really the intent," said Marshall, a Republican. He said the law covers "whatever devolves from a right of marriage."

Virginia Attorney General Jerry Kilgore has vowed to defend the law, saying it's clear that it targets only benefits "exclusive to the institution of marriage."

http://www.news-journalonline.com/Ne...AM01052304.htm

Kind of stramge really that a law would be passed that nobody actually knows what it is supposed to prevent from happening

Regards,

Lee

[basschick]

this whole "protect the institution of marriage thing" really pisses me off. i'd say that 75% of the men i know cheat on their wives. in fact, i'd say more christian right wing men cheat than others.

shows what they REALLY think of the sanctity of marriage, doesn't it? seems like complete bullshit.

[Lee]

Originally posted by basschick
this whole "protect the institution of marriage thing" really pisses me off. i'd say that 75% of the men i know cheat on their wives. in fact, i'd say more christian right wing men cheat than others.

shows what they REALLY think of the sanctity of marriage, doesn't it? seems like complete bullshit.

Im with you there Patti

I know straight couples who have 'dated' for a few years knowing full well that each of the people in the rlationship have cheated despite being married and on the other hand, i know of gay couples who have been completely faithful to each other for more than 10 years who arent allowed to marry.

Seems that they only draw the same arguments each time eben though those same arguments are proven to be incorrect

Regards,

Lee