Salt Lake's domestic partner ordinance has received the OK from state lawmakers - as long is it isn't called a domestic partner registry.

The Utah House approved legislation that restricts the definition of the registry but not who would be covered. The measure grew out of concerns that using the phrase domestic partners would be a violation of the state constitution which bans same-sex marriage. It also thwarted a bid by one of the state's most conservative lawmakers to enact a bill to bar cities from offering benefits to unmarried pairs under any circumstance.

Gay News From 365Gay.com

================

More progress.

Yet another example of how "marriage" laws and amendments can go well beyond just the pretense of "protecting marriage" and firmly into the land of ensuring that gays are treated as second class citizens.
So we can't give a NAME to the classification of benefits, cause it would violate the constitutional ban?

I see it as progress that they are considering it, but the WAY that they are considering it demonstrates serious problems with the system.