NYT Editorializes for Marriage

This morning the paper of record published a beautiful editorial in support of the California Supreme Court decision.

The California Supreme Court brought the United States a step closer to fulfilling its ideals of equality and justice with its momentous 4-to-3 ruling upholding the right of same-sex couples to marry.

The editorial also calls for support from the Presidential candidates:

Since the presidential candidates’ positions on gay marriage seem based more on tactics than principle, we do not expect them to shift ground. We would like to hear all of them support Mr. Schwarzenegger in opposing a constitutional amendment. Mr. McCain’s reaction that he “supports the right of the people of California” rather than judges to decide the question was not encouraging.

Perkins Gets Savage Beat Down

Openly gay columnist, author, husband and father Dan Savage had the unpleasant task of debating anti-gay Family Research Council President Tony Perkins last night on Anderson Cooper 360. Perkins is perhaps the most visible anti-gay advocate on the circuit right now and he is usually very effective in manipulating media; however, he was no match for the intellect of Mr. Savage.



The entire interview served as a microcosm for what we will see on a grand scale over the next six months. Perkins basically had little flash cards with pithy talking points on them that he pulled out at random: "Marriage is between a man and a woman," "Social science proves that children need a mom and a dad," "activist judges," etc. Savage proved though that the same old sound bites are no match for actual intelligent arguments.

Thank You!

This morning the California Supreme Court issued a historic 4-3 ruling that strikes down California's ban on same-sex marriage. This is a day that will forever be remembered in the journey toward equality.

Celebrate today, but we start the battle to maintain the ruling tomorrow.

Marriage in California!

Marriage on the Line in California

The state of California is proving itself to be the next battleground in the pursuit of marriage equality. As the California Supreme Court weighs whether or not they will grant full marriage rights and responsibilities to all Californians, anti-gay activists claim they have succeeded in getting the necessary amount of signatures to place the proposed “Limits on Marriage” constitutional amendment on the ballot in November.

Assuming their claim is accurate, the fate of relationship recognition is in the hands of California voters. Here are the various ways California could play out:

1. The Ideal Scenario: Supreme Court grants marriage and the initiative doesn’t have enough signatures to make the ballot.
Thousands of committed couples in California would finally have access to the privilege of marriage and a renewed sense of respect would return to the institution of marriage by those who have been denied for so long. Anti-gay activists would forever cry “judicial activism,” and they would continue to try every year to get on the ballot again, but in the meantime tens of millions of dollars could be saved by not fighting this fight in 2008.

2. The Probable Scenario: Supreme Court grants marriage and the initiative makes the ballot.
If marriage is granted, but the proposed amendment does in fact have enough signatures, then this election season grows even more important than it already is. Conventional wisdom is that money and organization equal victories in initiatives. With the backing of financial juggernauts like Focus on the Family, Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America, the opposition will be well funded and ready to organize from pulpits across the state. Equality advocates from around the country hopefully understand the gravity of this election and will funnel enough money to California to be competitive.

Evangelicals who are less-than-excited with McCain may have more of a reason to head to the polls in November, but if Democrats turn out as much as expected, California will have a chance to join Arizona as the only states to beat back a marriage initiative.

If equality advocates are victorious, the Supreme Court ruling reigns supreme and marriage will be a reality in California.

If the amendment passes, than the California Constitution is amended to say “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” This would nullify the Supreme Court decision and it would be extremely difficult for marriage equality to be achieved in California for a long time to come.

3. The Definitely Possible Scenario: Supreme Court denies marriage and the initiative makes the ballot.
The costly campaign would still be on but instead of fighting for the ability to get married immediately, Californians would be fighting to stop the amendment in hopes that a defeat would prove to Governor Schwarzenegger that his constituents are in favor of equality and that the next time the legislature puts a marriage bill on his desk, he needs to sign it.

California Court to Hear Marriage Case

Since this campaign season hasn't had Karl Rove to use the LGBT community as a wedge issue, this blog has turned out to be a lot more about Barack than it has been about LGBT issues. So, here is a detour from the campaign for some very exciting news.

The California Supreme Court has announced that they will hear oral arguments on March 4 in the marriage cases challenging the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage.

As a Californian, I am absolutely thrilled to see that it is our state's turn to hear the case for marriage equality. Bills that guarantee the freedom to marry have twice passed through the California legislation, but they have been vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger both times.

Late last year, this case received a significant amount of friend-of-the-court briefs from California municipalities, counties, and other advocacy organizations. The California people are ready for marriage, the legislature is ready for marriage, the cities are ready for marriage and we will find out soon if marriage equality will become a reality in California. The California Supreme Court typically issues its decisions within 90 days following oral arguments.

Since this is an Obama site, I will leave you with a statement of serious HOPE:

2008 marks the 60th anniversary of the California Supreme Court’s historic 1948 ruling that found it unconstitutional for the state to restrict access to marriage based on the race of the spouses. That ruling was the first of its kind in the nation’s history, and is now the law of the land across the country.

Read the whole story at Equality California.

Gore Comes Out for Marriage Equality

Former Vice President and progressive rock star Al Gore has done what none of the major presidential candidates have done--he has proclaimed his support for full marriage equality.




While I obviously wish that Senator Obama was also a proponent of full marriage equality, I am still confident that an Obama administration will be very positive for achieving equality and I am hopeful that after he is in office, he will make the next step for full marriage rights.