California Supremes Overturn Gay Marriage Ban

(From the SF Chronicle's Pride 2004 Wedding Album, a non-stop weep-for-joy fest. Aren't they a beautiful family?)

I melt at weddings. There's so much hope, promise, and happiness at a wedding. There's also no little amount of drama, but part of the pleasure is that the drama gets resolved pleasingly. (Mostly.) And it's often more fun to attend than it is to be one of the principle cast members, so to speak.

I got misty with joy when San Francisco legalized gay marriage and the town experienced a flurry of weddings after marriage licenses were issued at the city and county clerk's office, because a couple of friends had finally decided to tie the knot now that they could. (They aren't the ones pictured above, btw.) And I've always loved San Francisco's Gavin Newsom, aka Mayor McHottie, as fellow MOMocrat CityMama's dubbed him, for throwing open the door to people in the LGBT community who want to get married.

As you can imagine, as soon as the environmentally-correct millet was thrown, lawsuits were filed to define marriage as a union specifically between a man and a woman. It took about a month before that door was slammed shut. But recently, the Huffington Post reports that the California Supreme Court recently handed down a 4-3 decision saying that domestic partnerships are not equivalent to marriage (they are instead sort of "separate and unequal" to marriages, to borrow a phrase).

With the ruling, California could become the second state after Massachusetts where gay and lesbian residents can marry.

...

California already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic partners the same legal rights and responsibilities as married spouses, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support. It's therefore unclear what additional relief state lawmakers could offer short of marriage if the court renders the existing ban unconstitutional.

From the ruling itself (available as a pdf file from this page):

The question we must address is whether the failure...to designate the official relationship of same-sex couples as marriage violates the California Constitution.

...

...assigning a different designation for the family relationship of same-sex couples while reserving the historic designation of "marriage" exclusively for opposite sex couples poses at least a serious risk of denying the family relationship of same-sex couples equal dignity and respect.  

Furthermore, the ruling goes on to say that the distinction between 'domestic partnerships' and 'marriages' is one that doesn't pass the strict scrutiny test as triggered by consideration of rights that fall under the equal protection clause of the California Constitution. Translation: 'marriage' applies to bonds between same-sex and opposite-sex couples. Grist for the U. S. Supreme Court docket? You betcha.

I know I'm in the minority on this one so far as the rest of the country goes.

I feel if lesbian and gay couples want to get married so they too can occasionally work each other's last nerve into old age together, poke fun at their spouse's love handles, and if they have kids, completely forget what having a sex life is or was--hey, why not? If more people want to marry and commit to each other "for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health...til death do us part" (or whatever vows are meaningful to them), they should Go Right Ahead. And they should absolutely be afforded the over 1,000 federal benefits and rights currently enjoyed by married opposite-sex couples, like social security benefits and the ability to apply for a spouse's immigration. Oh, and the ability to file tax forms jointly--oooh, so kinky and out there.

The beauty of it is that any same-sex or opposite-sex marriage adds to the sum total of love in the world and strengthens the social fabric for those who choose it. Nobody has to be a second class citizen or experience second class benefits, rights, protections, or responsibilities relative to anyone else.

If I personally am not one of the parties marrying--it requires zero effort on my part except choosing a gift! And, extra bonus--it takes nothing away from me, a slightly haggard, chronically sleep-deprived, straight married parent! I just show up at the appointed date and hour, relish the pageantry, and let the joyful waterworks begin.

Cynematic blogs at P i l l o w b o o k.

Comments

[Sarah Granger]

I'm so happy the CA Supreme Court finally ruled this way. I'm not in SF tonight but I'm betting there's some hard partying going on.

I started a comment on why I support full gay marriage, but it went on way too long. I'll write about that another time. Let's just say I'm happy for my gay and lesbian friends in California who choose marriage.

[cynematic]

*High-fivin' Sarah* Woo-hoo! Now that the ruling's been made, 30 days from now (June 16) there'll be a rush to apply for marriage licenses. An anti-gay marriage initiative will be on the ballot in November, but 'til then it's wedding season. Hopefully the November initiative gets defeated too. And the Governator is saying he won't try to overturn the CA State Supreme Court ruling.