 |
|
Despite the snow, sleet and ice, the Vermont Freedom to Marry Task Force hasn't been idle this winter; we've managed to hold several forums around the state.
One took place on January 31 at the North Universalist Chapel Society in Woodstock. Two representatives of the task force offered the Sunday sermon 'On the Human Right to Love and Marry.'
Bari Shamas addressed the spiritual burden placed on families denied basic civil rights, while Sandi Cote focused on the spiritual aspect of social change.
The sermon generated a lively discussion that continued during the coffee hour after the service. Bari gave the group a brief history of marriage and outlined a few of the problems that she and her partner have encountered raising their two children. She also explained the responsibilities and rights associated with civil marriage. Sandi updated the congregation on the growing number of churches that have joined the struggle for social equality and addressed some of the problems she and her partner have encountered in their own spiritual journey.
On February 7, the Task Force showed the video A Green Mountain View at the coffee hour following the Sunday sermon at Bennington's Second Congregational Church — Vermont's first Open and Affirming UCC church. Sandi Cote provided an overview of problems surrounding the marriage issue, updated the congregation on the Supreme Court case and fielded numerous questions.
Two days later, there was another Bennington presentation of A Green Mountain View, this time at Southern Vermont College. During a class on social interaction, Joe Schaap and Sandi Cote led a spirited group discussion on the impact of civil marriage in society. Students explored the differences between civil and religious marriage and the contrasts between civil marriage and reciprocal benefits arrangements.
Cayetano's proposal would grant gay and lesbian couples many of the financial benefits of marriage but would withhold adoption, parental rights, and the term 'marriage.'
He seems to feel that opposition to domestic partnership benefits would be less strenuous than it was to same-gender marriage. "You're going to find that the homophobes and the very conservative people on the other side will not have the same kind of strength in their alliance as they did on traditional marriage," Cayetano said.
John Hoag, a prominent local traditional marriage advocate against the proposed plan believes the danger with establishing domestic partnerships is that it would set up gays and lesbians as a special class of people.
Meanwhile, lawyers on both sides of the original same-gender marriage case are waiting for Hawaii's Supreme Court to make the next move. The court has asked both sides to submit briefs on the impact of last November's vote approving a constitutional amendment rejecting same-gender marriage on the 1996 Circuit Court ruling permitting marriage.
