C010 - General Convention: General Convention Site Choices

Home | Search

A witness of God's inclusive love to the Episcopal Church and the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community.

No good thing will God withhold from those who walk with Integrity. Psalm 84:11

620 Park Avenue #311, Rochester, NY 14607-2943 | 800-462-9498 |

ORIGINAL TEXT

Resolution C010

Title: General Convention Site Choices

Topic:

Committee: Social and Urban Affairs

House of Initial Action: Bishops

Proposer: Diocese of Newark

Resolved, the House of _____ concurring, That the 75th General Convention direct that the Joint Standing Committee on Planning and Arrangements shall not propose to this or any future General Convention for its approval any site for an upcoming General Convention which is located in a state that prohibits domestic partnerships or the rights associated therewith.

EXPLANATION

This is not a resolution on same-sex marriage.  Rather, it seeks to enforce two resolutions passed by earlier General Conventions, one thirty years ago:

1976:  Homosexuals   Equal Protection (1976 - A071)

Resolved, That this [65th] General Convention expresses its conviction that homosexual persons are entitled to equal protection of the laws with all other citizens, and calls upon our society to see that such protection is provided in actuality.

1994:  Domestic Partnerships (1994 - D006a)

Resolved, … That the 71st General Convention call upon municipal councils, state legislatures and the United States Congress to approve measures giving gay and lesbian couples protections such as: bereavement and family leave policies, health benefits, pension benefits, real-estate transfer tax benefits, and rights to the same kinds of mutual support enjoyed by non-gay married couples.

This resolution is intended to be proscriptive only.  With state laws changing rapidly, there is no intention that once a site is approved by Convention that it will be changed should the state in which the convention site is located subsequently approves anti-domestic partnership legislation.

Currently there are only two states that have clear anti-domestic partnership laws or constitutional amendments in place - Texas and Ohio.  Nebraska had such a law but it was struck down by Federal District Judge in May 2005, on the grounds that it was overly broad in its denial of free association.  The State, however, is appealing that ruling.  This is not intended to apply to the bulk of the 40 states that have enacted "Defense of Marriage" statutes or constitutional amendments.  Only 14 of these statutes or amendments go beyond marriage to prohibit "civil unions" or other relationships "substantially similar to marriage."  These states are: Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Utah, in addition to Texas and Ohio.  This resolution is intended to apply only to those states, like Ohio and Texas, which clearly prohibit any rights or benefits associated with domestic partnership, including those obtained through collective bargaining.

News

Friendly Blogs

Unfriendly Blogs

Click here to submit website comments, corrections, or updates by e-mail!