The House Judiciary Committee took that step on Wednesday, deciding by a vote of 8-3 to support domestic partnerships as it begins the job of drafting legislation. But the president of a group opposed to same-sex marriage had a different view.
Domestic partnership ought to look like marriage.
It could even be connected to marriage. The Legislature could provide that one of the means of securing legal standing as domestic partners would be a marriage certificate from one of the religious faiths now willing to marry same-sex couples. In choosing to pursue domestic partnerships, the committee is aware of the disappointment that will be felt by those who believe that treating heterosexual and homosexual couples differently creates a stigma. The sting of that disappointment may be lessened by considering the pluses and minuses of each approach. It is likely that either domestic partnerships or marriage would satisfy the substance of the demand by the Supreme Court that same-sex couples receive benefits equal to those enjoyed by heterosexual married couples.