?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

I don't know how I missed this one...

Va. Assembly overrides Warner on DP rights


Legislature ‘set the state back years’

Text of Va.’s ban on recognition of civil unions
A civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage is prohibited. Any such civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement entered into by persons of the same sex in another state or jurisdiction shall be void in all respects in Virginia and any contractual rights created thereby shall be void and unenforceable.

My home state. Horrifying. I wish I were better educated in legal matters, so I could better comment on this.

Tags:

Comments

( 28 comments — Leave a comment )
ubet_cha
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:13 pm (UTC)
How old is this law/reg...whatever? I'm really surprised to see it. Virginia can be conservative sure, but usually on common sense topics. This is amazing.
ubet_cha
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:14 pm (UTC)
Nevermind, I just reaf the link....damn lazy mind.
snidegrrl
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:17 pm (UTC)
Yeah, it looks like something ages old. But it's current events. Isn't that fucked up??? WHY WOULD SOMEONE NOT WANT SOMEONE ELSE TO SIGN A CONTRACT??? What the fuck is going on in the VA legislature. Who are these people? I mean I knew I grew up in Pat Robertson/700 Club/ Regent University land but really!!
devil_panda
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:21 pm (UTC)

Virginia politics is a cesspool. Most of Virginia is southern bible belt country, with only a few moderate and liberal islands. (Most notably Northern Virginia.)
cheetahmaster
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:29 pm (UTC)
Agreed, not sure why people are surprised by this. It's pretty much par the course for Virginia.
snidegrrl
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:31 pm (UTC)
I guess I wasn't paying attention when I lived there.
tommx
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:23 pm (UTC)
take some small comfort in the fact that this law will probably get shot down in the supreme court as it would be deemed unconstitutional to invalidate a will based on the fact that one man may choose to leave his estate to a same sex partner. it is clearly discriminatory since it is not illegal or unenforcable for a man to leave his estate to another man who is not his same sex partner.

this doesn't change the fact that this sucks giant donky balls.
snidegrrl
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:34 pm (UTC)
i'm sure you're right... but i wonder how long that will take? and that only addresses one aspect of the civil union... which isn't good enough anyways... sigh.
judithiscariot
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:58 pm (UTC)
executing a will is entirely different from being a designated beneficiary.
tommx
Apr. 28th, 2004 02:03 pm (UTC)
true, but becuase of this law, the tax consequences would be disaterous to the beneficiary.

i admit i'm no expert on law or probate.
judithiscariot
Apr. 28th, 2004 02:11 pm (UTC)
im not sure how this changes the tax consequences endured by same-sex beneficiaries NOW.
tommx
Apr. 28th, 2004 02:24 pm (UTC)
"A civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage is prohibited. Any such civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement entered into by persons of the same sex in another state or jurisdiction shall be void in all respects in Virginia and any contractual rights created thereby shall be void and unenforceable."

as i understand this, it basically means that if i were living with a man, and i wanted to leave him my estate in a will, i would have to word it in such a way as to present him as being anything but a spouse in order to keep the will from being invalidated. my understanding (which is limited, as i've repeatedly said) is that the tax consequences of doing that are more severe than leaving your estate to a spouse. hence, the best possible scenario here is that the surviving spouse gets royally screwed. i'm not saying that changes the tax consequences as they are now, i'm saying that it is ensuring that they will remain as they are or get worse.

jlfranklin
Apr. 28th, 2004 02:35 pm (UTC)
I think it goes beyond leaving it in a will. It's sufficiently vague that entering into a BUSINESS arrangement with someone of the same sex is illegal. That is, if I wanted to buy a house with a male friend of mine (because they're way too expensive here in NoVa), I might be breaking the law.
tommx
Apr. 28th, 2004 02:41 pm (UTC)
only if your business agreement sounds like a marriage arrangement. of course, who is going to decide such a thing...i shudder to contemplate the ramifications.
judithiscariot
Apr. 28th, 2004 03:03 pm (UTC)
i would have to word it in such a way as to present him as being anything but a spouse in order to keep the will from being invalidated

this is not difficult.

at any rate, the tax consequences of leaving property to a same-sex partner is essentially the same as if you decided to leave it to a stranger -- that is to say, more severe than leaving it to a legal spouse/child/etc. but this is the way it is NOW and this law doesnt appear to change that.

dont get me wrong, this law is abysmal. im just saying that we have to take a careful look at what it actually says in order to fight it on its (*snort*) merits.
seth6666
Apr. 28th, 2004 02:00 pm (UTC)
unfortunately, i'm fairly certain that the tax consequences of leaving your estate to someone who is non-familial are fairly odious, in comparison to leaving your estate to a spouse.

and yes. this _does_ suck giant donky balls.

-S
zanramon
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:26 pm (UTC)
And Warner is supposed to be a prime canidate for Kerry's running mate.. and merely opposes same sex marriages and civil unions.. fan-tastic.
snidegrrl
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:28 pm (UTC)
And people wondered why I was hesitant to wear a "Women for Kerry" sticker at the march...
ubet_cha
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:32 pm (UTC)
There's a lot of talk of dumping Kerry before the primary. The last call was from the Village Voice the other day. Will it happen? Doubtful, but I can hope. I'm not a Democrat ( or a Republican) but I was looking for someone I could vote for this year.
ubet_cha
Apr. 28th, 2004 04:30 pm (UTC)
Thanks, I book marked it and will keep an eye for when he finishes.
evilhat
Apr. 28th, 2004 01:58 pm (UTC)
Warner doesn't. Problem is, as far as I know, Warner basically represents NoVA, which is a very different beast from the rest of Virginia. He knew the legislature was going to pass this one way or another, with enough of a majority to override a veto, so he tried to soften the language to be less restrictive (no civil unions, partnership contracts still allowed) -- and the legislature overrode him anyway.

Fornication is still illegal in Virginia -- technically making heterosexual cohabitation illegal as well.

Liberals should clearly move to Maryland. ;)
snidegrrl
Apr. 28th, 2004 02:03 pm (UTC)
I take this to send the opposite message... liberals clearly need to move to Virginia and get cracking... :)
devil_panda
Apr. 28th, 2004 02:29 pm (UTC)

Since we're on the subject, the last time Virginia's electoral college votes went to a non-republican was back in 1964 to Lyndon Johnson.

Its enough to make me want to grow a mullet.
keryx
Apr. 28th, 2004 04:58 pm (UTC)
Yeah, but other liberals apparently AREN'T going to do that. We're moving to the west coast... cause I'm sorry, but Maryland only looks good sitting next to VA. ;)
railwaymadness
Apr. 28th, 2004 02:39 pm (UTC)
Man, Virginia Code Title 18.2 Chapter 8 is the best! Hours of entertainment.
I've considered having the "Lewd and Lascivious Cohabitation" ban made into a nice plaque and hung on the front door of my house. Hmm. Then I could decorate the back door with the "Fornication" and "Crimes Against Nature". Because, wow, I knew it was illegal but I hadn't realized that virginia was full of felons.

Huh. It seems like Arlington should have elected to exempt itself from 18.2-341 (making it illegal to transact business on Sunday) but I can't find that exemption anywhere. Will x-post to own journal.
mpeg2tom
Apr. 29th, 2004 12:42 am (UTC)
Yeah, we've got a Republican governor in Maryland, who legalized medical MJ...
larksdream
Apr. 28th, 2004 02:25 pm (UTC)
How very unsubtle. Looks like someone took out the "fags we hate you" part at the very last minute...
( 28 comments — Leave a comment )