Prop 8 ruling

Image by John Lemieux via Flickr

TAPPED, American Prospect's blog has an interesting reaction to the California Supreme Court decision. Kansas is one of those states where domestic partnerships are not only illegal, but unconstitutional. Kansas is one of the states where is it legal to fire someone because of their sexual orientation.

"At The Nation, Richard Kim urges activists to think twice before rushing toward an expensive battle to overturn Prop 8 at the ballot box in 2010. Why? Because California's domestic partnerships -- unlike DPs in other states -- already include all the rights and responsibilities of marriage." Kim writes:

I know people's emotions are very raw now; there are dozens of rallies planned around the country tonight. That's all fine and good. But the decision on whether or not to sink massive dollars and resources into an initiative to reverse Prop 8 in 2010 (remember, Prop 8 was the second most expensive election in the country in 2008; only the presidency cost more), should take this relative equality into account. There are dozens of states where same-sex couples have no partnership rights whatsoever; states where it is still legal to fire someone because they are gay; a federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act is still stalled in Congress. Aren't those better and more inclusive movement goals than an uphill initiative that would give same-sex couples the M-word in one state only? (emphasis added)