When will Michigan recognize same-sex marriages?
I live in Michigan, a Top 10-ranked state in population and one that hasn't voted Republican, in a presidential election, since 1988. I'm happy for the states that are going to marriage equality -- allowing people of the same gender to become married. I am wanting it in every state plus District of Columbia. Thing that it has me concerned with this: Will Michigan Democrats go for same-sex marriage or do the delay bullshit of asking first for civil unions?
I looked at the the state's Democratic party platform. Granted, it was for 2012. But here is what it says (on page 20).…
* * *
We will vigorously promote measures that ensure the full civil rights of Michigan’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) citizens.
• The Michigan Democratic Party strongly opposes all measures that aim to criminalize same-gender relationships and conduct. We call for the repeal of 2004 Proposition 2, which under the guise of “protecting” marriage, has deprived same-sex couples of being eligible for medical insurance coverage, visitation rights, and many other employment benefits, as well as having incorporated discrimination into our State Constitution. Our opposition to these discriminatory measures is in accord with the Michigan Civil Service Commission’s prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in state employment.
• We strongly support the inclusion of LGBT persons in the protection given by the Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act and Michigan’s Ethnic Intimidation Act. We favor the addition of sexual orientation to the equal protection and non-discrimination provisions of Article I, Section 2 of the Michigan Constitution.
• We support full inclusion of LGBT families in the life of our state and seek equal responsibilities, benefits and protections for those families, including the right to adopt and raise children.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||05/09/2013|
It will be awhile. West Michigan is gaining a lot of political power because it's the only success story in the state. And West Michigan is notoriously conservative.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||05/01/2013|
Good luck with that with Snyder in office and the gerrymandered GOP legislatures. Michigan's gay friendliness laws are akin to Mississippi.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||05/01/2013|
Michigan is a large state that has a conservative West side of the state, conservative north, and the entire UP is stuck in the 1980s conservative mode. With cities strong on the pro-gay radar like Ann Arbor, Royal Oak, and parts of Detroit, I'm afraid it is baby steps with Michigan. It will be a slow step in the right direction with the civil unions, but full human/civil rights marriage... not yet, sadly.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||05/01/2013|
Michigan has a very organized and zealous anti-gay movement. It has challenged about gay rights law with voter referenda, sometimes successfully.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||05/06/2013|
Thing is, R5, the Republicans haven't won the state in a presidential race since 1988. They won the U.S. Senate election when the Republicans had the "Revolution" in 1994. But Spencer Abraham was unseated six years later by Democratic challenger and now-a-third-term Debbie Stabenow. The GOP can't win on that level in Mich. neither. (Though they have had wins for one of the Senate seats in other blue states like Illinois and Pennsylvania.)
Thing is: I don't trust the Democrats in Michigan greatly because enough of them will cross over for their perception of a 2010s version of a Moderate Republican. They demonstrated this with Rick Snyder winning the governorship in 2010.
The Democrats in Michigan are not a sophisticated bunch. They contributed to voting for a state constitutional amendment -- "between one man and one woman" -- in 2004. They were against George W. Bush's presidency and were hoping like hell John Kerry would unseat Bush. But they voted against LGBT people -- by crossing over and voting with the Republicans against LGBT people.
Here we are nearly 10 years later. The northeast, especially in New England, are there for the LGBT people first. The state of Washington came through before Michigan. No surprise to me. So I want Michigan and its Democrats to spring into action. But this has to happen with the aid of the state Democratic party.
Next year, U.S. Sen. Carl Levin will be replaced on the ballot because he has opted not to run for re-election. (Levin was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1978. He's going to be 80 in 2014.) The nomination will probably go to congressman Gary Peters. I don't feel a great deal of excitement over this. Granted, this is a year and a half from the midterms elections of 2014. But the planning takes a good deal of time.
I don't feel impressed by the Michigan Democratic Party. So I guess everyone here would pretty much say, "Watch for 10 other blue states to come through for the LGBT people before Michigan does. Even though Michigan ranks among the Top 10 states in terms of population."
Thank you, everyone, for helping out with this thread! I appreciate your honesty. I just think marriage equality -- and all rights for LGBT persons -- need to be recognized and regarded no matter where one lives in the United States of America. Short of that, this is not a country that actually lives up to being a "United States…" (Then again, some would say, "Since when have we ever been?")
|by Anonymous||reply 6||05/06/2013|
I live in Kalamazoo, OP, but I have lived all over Michigan. All I can say about Michigan democrats is that they are not really liberal the way an East coast liberal would be. Socially, many Michigan democrats are socially conservative on issues like gays and drugs. When I lived in Bloomfield hills, everyone around me voted democrat, but against many liberal amendments. People like that are enough to make Michigan a democrat state, but not enough to bring about social change. Real liberals live mostly in College towns like AA and Kazoo.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||05/06/2013|
I live in MI too! That's hawwwwt. Unfortunately there are no hot guys here, so marriage isn't a huge concern for me.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||05/06/2013|
The state legislature is very much entralled with the Catholic church so it's going to take a lot of work or a federal mandate.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||05/09/2013|
Yeah, I would imagine Montana, the Dakotas, Nebraska, and Wyoming will have marriage equality before Michigan. Michigan banned same sex marriage in 2004 by 59 percent. It would be closer now, but definitely a huge gamble to put it on the ballot. The legislature and governor are very antigay.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||05/09/2013|
What states don't need the legislature to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot?
|by Anonymous||reply 11||05/09/2013|
Michigan is another example of a state where stupid liberals sat out the 2010 election "to teach Obama a lesson" and screwed themselves right into a gerrymandered state controlled by Republicans.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||05/09/2013|
Liberals didn't do any such thing. It was centrists like Emmanuel and Obama who sat it out.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||05/09/2013|
Keep telling yourself that, r13.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||05/09/2013|
R14, Obama and Emmanuel have proved that they are Republicans in everything but name, stupidity, and crazy.
Some blogger made the claim that liberals said they would stay home, but it's a lie.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||05/09/2013|
If Michigan had half a bit of sense (which they don't), they'd realize that gay marriage would help their shitty economy.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||05/09/2013|
"Obama and Emmanuel have proved that they are Republicans in everything but name, stupidity, and crazy."
So not voting for them in 2010 was a good way to teach them a lesson, wasn't it? I bet they learned it good.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||05/09/2013|