Domestic partner laws debated in Nevada Legislature

Emotions ran high on Friday as Nevada lawmakers debated bills dealing with same-sex domestic partners and discrimination based on sexual orientation and "gender identity or expression."

Sen. David Parks, D-Las Vegas, an openly gay state lawmaker, said at one point during Senate Commerce and Labor Committee testimony on his SB207 that he was offended by criticism of the plan that prohibits discrimination in public places based on sexual orientation.

During the committee hearing, Lynn Chapman of conservative Nevada Families said she opposed it because it could give "predators and pedophiles" opportunities to prey on children in bathrooms or locker rooms.

An irate Parks responded that Chapman was "making disparaging comments regarding people," adding, "There is nothing in this bill that talks about sexual offenders and pedophiles. I am grossly offended."

In a separate Assembly Commerce and Labor hearing on Friday, criticism of AB184, prohibiting discrimination by employers with regard to gender identity or expression, prompted another lawmaker to say he was offended, and resulted in some gavel-banging by the chairman to keep the debate orderly.

When AB184 was criticized on religious grounds by Janine Hansen of conservative Nevada Eagle Forum, Assemblyman William Horne, D-Las Vegas, snapped that he found it offensive that someone would "use the shield of religion to support discrimination."

David Schumann of the conservative Nevada Committee for Full Statehood then argued the bill would force employers to hire "a girl using the men's room." That caused another stir, prompting the committee chairman, Assemblyman Marcus Conklin, D-Las Vegas, to slam down his gavel and say, "Hang on!"

In the Senate committee hearing on SB283, Parks' domestic partnership act, he said the plan would give same-sex domestic partners all of the rights and benefits that Nevada offers to married couples.

"These couples buy homes, have families and in other ways, seek to create stable, productive lives," Parks said. "Legal protections for their relationships provide basic stability that other long-term, committed couples have."

Other proponents included Pamela Brooks of Reno, who said she was denied access to the body of her long-term partner after she passed away in a hospital.

"I never saw her body again, and that was the last of our relationship," Brooks said, adding that she "doesn't want special rights, only equal rights."

Jill Switzer of Stonewall Democrats of Northern Nevada said the bill would give her partner and their four boys the medical, legal and financial protection that other families enjoy.

"It would give all the rights and obligations afforded to committed Nevada families, to all committed Nevada families, ensuring every citizen of this great state feels valued and accepted," Brooks said.

Richard Ziser of Nevada Concerned Citizens and the Coalition for the Protection of Marriage argued that SB283 was unconstitutional and "simply just another name for marriage" for same-sex couples.