Big Day for Marriage

Lot's of people think that just because Prop 8 passes in California that nothing new is happening on the marriage front.  That couldn't be further from the truth.  Small steps are being taken every day in the quest for equality.

Today, Senator Schumer of New York came out in favor of same-sex marriage and for the repeal of DOMA.    Senator Schumer is the last state-wide elected official of that state to take a stand for equality.  This is a big step for the senator, who was one of those voting for DOMA years ago when it became law.  In it's statement to the NY Daily News, Senator Schumer's office said,

"It’s time. Equality is something that has always been a hallmark of America and no group should be deprived of it. New York, which has always been at the forefront on issues of equality, is appropriately poised to take a lead on this issue."

Also in the news today, the Vermont senate voted 26-4 in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage for the state.  The issue will now move to committee in the house before being presented for a full vote.  With a majority of Democrats in the House, the measure is expected to pass.  However, there is still uncertainty around whether or not the Republican Governor Jim Douglas will sign the bill if it is passed.  Vermont was the first state to legalize civil-unions back in 2000.

for my wife . . .

Friends and family often ask why it matters whether we can marry. In their eyes, todays' gays and lesbians lead fairly normal lives with little interference. Why can't we just leave things alone and be happy with what we've achieved. I don't know if my feeble attempts to explain to them the importance of that piece of paper ever really gets through, although I do try.

For them, this is why we want to marry. This is what it's all about. Although all the rights and privileges afforded married couples would be great, at the heart of the matter is our dignity. When the person we have shared years of our lives with lays dying in a hospital bed, we want to be able to hold their hands and be with them. When decisions need to be made concerning medical care, we want the person closest to us to be consulted rather than someone we may see only once or twice a year. We need to have our relationships acknowledged at the most critical times in our lives.

The trailer below is for the documentary, for my wife. It is Charlene Strong's tribute to her partner of nine years, Kate Fleming. Kate drowned after a torrential rainstorm flooded the couple's basement. Charlene was only allowed into the hospital room where Kate lay dying after Kate's sister called the hospital. After Kate died, the funeral director would not recognize Charlene in making the funeral arrangements, instead directing all questions to Kate's mother. Watch the trailer, read the story in the Advocate, and see the film. Then, hopefully, you can stand with us in seeking to gain the rights and dignity all people deserve.

Silencing the Christians

The American Family Association is at it again.  They have produced an hour long info-mercial.  An NBC affiliate in Michigan was to have aired the production prior to Obama's press conference.  However, after being approached by the HRC and receiving numerous letters revealing the controversy surrounding this fim, the station decided not to air it.

It's hard to watch, but I did.  I felt that I need to know what those with an opposing view are saying.  While I respect the rights of people to believe that homosexuality is wrong, I don't respect their attempts to force those beliefs on all of society.  But more importantly, it is necessary to make sure that any untruths and/or distortions be met head on and corrected.  The only way we can do that is to know what is being said.  The video can be seen at the Silencing Christians website.

With Focus on California, Northeast States May Pass Marriage Laws

Over the past few months, while the nation has focused on Prop 8 in California, three states have inched forward in a move toward equality.  Both Vermont and Maine have introduced legislation to legalize gay marriage and New Hampshire is holding public hearings on the possibility.  Each of these small steps forward will eventually lead to our equality throughout the entire nation.  Progress takes time.  But we are getting there.

Please Don't Divorce Us

Ken Starr, who led the campaign to impeach President Bill Clinton, filed a legal brief last month -- on behalf of the "Yes on 8" campaign -- that would forcibly divorce 18,000 same-sex couples that were married in California last year before the passage of Prop 8.

Watch "Fidelity" and sign the letter to the state Supreme Court. Tell the Supreme Court to invalidate Prop 8, reject Ken Starr's case, and let loving, committed couples marry. DEADLINE: Valentine's Day.

Courage Campaign

Gay Marriage is Good for America

I didn't expect to see this op-ed piece when I logged into the Wall Street Journal this morning.  But there it was.  An opinion in one of the most conservative papers in the U.S., for all the conservatives to read.  Wow - I'd love to see the reactions on main street this morning.

Anyway, Jonathan Rauch makes an excellent case for why gay marriage is good for America.  His words lead the reader to imagine life the way most gay people live it, without the hope for marriage.  A world where committment usually means 'until something better comes along' and where abandonement and lonliness abound.  Pieces like this move gay marriage closer to acceptance than the pictures that are shown on CNN or the Nightly News.  This kind of writing attempts to put the reader in the shoes of the lesbian who can't protect her partner's inheritance or the gay man who isn't allowed to make medical decisions for his partner of many years.

Keep up the good work, Jonathan.  With more editorials like this I may just see gay marriage accepted all across the country before I die!

Lesbian Kiss at Mariners Ballpark

Last week, at a Seattle Mariners game, two people engaged in a public display of affections.  Like many other couples in ballparks across the country, they kissed.  And another patron at the game complained that their action was inappropriate.  Why?  Because the couple was a same-sex lesbian couple and the woman complaining didn't want to have to explain two women kissing to her child.

Like the parent at the stadium, there are those who don't want their kids exposed to what they call perversion. They don't want tolerance taught in the schools because it is seen as pushing an agenda they don't agree with.

So how does this parent respond when her kid comes home talking about the new kid in class who has two mommies or two daddies? Should the new kid not be allowed to go to school in order to keep the other children from being exposed to the idea that not all families are alike?

You don't have to believe that homosexuality is moral, but you do have realize that your children are going to be confronted with the reality of homosexuality at young ages. I have several friends in same-sex relationships who have children. Their kids will be attending school. And if the other children are not taught tolerance, then my friends kids will become the victims of bullying or worse.

There are reasons to expose children to things you may disagree with. They exist in society. You cannot shelter your children. Teach them. And if you must believe that homosexuality is wrong, teach them to hate the sin and love the sinner so that they will not inflict harm on the children of same-sex relationships.

And maybe they will grow up to see that we are all the same.

Chief Justice Ronald George - Unlikely Ally

Most who disagree with the California Supreme Courts decision legalizing gay marriage in California would say this is what happens when courts are made up of activist judges. You know, those activist Democratic judges appointed by Democratic governors and approved by Democratic legislators.

But how to account for this California court? It's made up of a majority Republican bench, elected by the people of California. Who's ever heard of an activist Republican judge? Maybe it's because the judges aren't activist. They are following legal precedent set by rulings from an earlier time. They are doing what our founding fathers expected of them - examining the constitutionality of legislation and protecting the rights of the minority from the will of the mob majority.

None knows this better than Chief Justice Ronald George. Justice George even took it upon himself to pen the ruling, willing to take the heat of controversy he knew would be coming. And, even knowing of the controversy to come, he did what was right casting the deciding vote for justice and right in the face of fierce opposition from those in his own party. Thank you Justice George. History will smile favorably on you.

Mildred Loving's Take on Equal Marriage

Mildred Loving supported us -

“I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.”

Mildred Loving, who with her husband won the 1967 Supreme Court case that overturned laws against interracial marriage, in a June 2007 statement about the case. Loving, 68, died May 2; her husband preceded her in death. (New York Times, May 3)

The Bells are Gonna Chime

They did it. The High Court of California overturned the state statutes that ban gay marriage. It may only last until November, when there will be a state constitutional amendment on the ballot to ban gay marriage. But until then, let the wedding bells ring.

Full Faith and Credit

I've been saying all along that any laws or state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage would eventually be deemed unconstitutional under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Federal Constitution.  The clause is short and basically states that any state must recognize the contracts and judicial proceedings of any other state.  It is the, in essence, the glue holding our nation together.  It makes legal in this state what is legal in another.

Loving v. the State of Virginia was decided on the basis of the Full Faith and Credit clause.  Today, the California Supreme Court will issue its ruling in a landmark gay marriage case, just as it did in an inter-racial marriage case 19 years prior to Loving v. the State of Virginia.  The arguments presented to the court included the reference to the Loving case.  Lets hope that California does the right thing.  Because it seems that as California goes, so goes the rest of the nation.  Eventually.