More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Jamie McGonnigal

GET UPDATES FROM Jamie McGonnigal
 

He Died Waiting to Get Married

Posted: 12/09/11 02:22 AM ET

In March Derence Kernek and Ed Watson recorded a video requesting that California's 9th Circuit Court allow Judge Vaughn Walker's decision to overturn Prop 8 to stand. This request was due to Watson having recently been diagnosed with a rapid-onset Alzheimer's. The couple wanted to be married while Watson still had memories of their 40 years together.

On Aug. 4, 2010, Judge Walker had ruled that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional, as it denied gays and lesbians due process and equal protection under the law. As Walker had not disclosed that he was gay and in a relationship at the time, Prop 8 supporters filed a motion to dismiss his decision, as he would stand to benefit from it. Of course, their argument fails to recognize that according to their anti-gay claims, any heterosexual judge would stand to benefit from a decision in their favor.

That argument failed in a lower court, and arguments before the 9th Circuit were being heard on Dec. 8 in regard to the Prop 8 proponents' appeal of that decision.

Close to midnight, on the eve of these arguments, Watson passed away due to complications from his quickly advancing Alzheimer's and diabetes. He and Kernek were never married.

On top of that, because of the inequality in the law, and the couple's inability to marry, Watson had been denied coverage under Kernek's retirement plan (as any heterosexual couple would be entitled to). This caused incredible financial hardships.

Kernek could not be reached for comment, as their phone had been disconnected.

Please watch the video that this couple put together urging for marriage equality in California

 
In March Derence Kernek and Ed Watson recorded a video requesting that California's 9th Circuit Court allow Judge Vaughn Walker's decision to overturn Prop 8 to stand. This request was due to Watson h...
In March Derence Kernek and Ed Watson recorded a video requesting that California's 9th Circuit Court allow Judge Vaughn Walker's decision to overturn Prop 8 to stand. This request was due to Watson h...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 3,152
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (35 total)
03:29 PM on 12/21/2011
Marriage is accepted by all the religions named because it has nothing to do with religion in truth. It is about procreation and family. It is NOT about just the couple to be married. There have been in the past history of marriage in various states (and still are I might add) laws that require the persons to be married to have a health exam (or blood test) to rule out certain diseases. If found to have certain diseases they may not marry. Most of these laws are gone now, but some states still have them (Connecticut, Mississippi, Montana are examples). This all makes marriage a privilege and not a right. I ask that all who keep calling this a right rethink their process in arriving at that conclusion. It is simply not a right but a privilege. The real question should be do LGBT couples still meet the requirements for the privilege to marry. That is a whole different question and whole other way of looking at this issue. Now think about that and provide your answers.
01:39 PM on 12/26/2011
Actually, yes, marriage is a right -- but like ALL rights, it has a definition and conditions! I challenge anyone to name any right whatsoever that is not defined and conditional. How can you grant any right if you can't even say what on earth that right is?

The right to marry, quite simply, is that if you qualify for for what is legally and socially accepted as a marriage, then yes, you have the right to go through the required process to have your qualifying relationship legally registered as a marriage with its benefits and responsibilities.

There is no right to unilaterally alter or mutilate the definition of marriage so as to get a no-qualifying relationship accepted as a "marriage." That's not a right, that's fraud!
04:12 PM on 12/26/2011
A driver does not have the right to drive, he is given the privlege to drive. A marriage license is EXACTLY the same thing. You are given the privlege to marry you are not born with it as a right. It is in fact an alienable right not inalienable right. You miss the most obvious in front of you. in how many words can I say it...you are given this it is NOT inherent.
photo
FTracy3
My micro-bio is as empty as the rest of my life.
03:51 PM on 12/13/2011
Sad story, but even if the courts had moved more quickly, is someone dying of rapidly advancing alzheimer's legally competent to get married?
07:09 AM on 12/13/2011
everyone has heard the arguments against gay marriage, that god intended it for man and woman, but due to seperation of church and state why is this an issue. the only reason for not allowing gay marriage is religious ones. marriage in the U.S is a LEGAL document, buddist, christian, athiest, jew it is the same peice of paper so why not allow gays. religion has no bearing on legal goverment issues. after all the last time we mixed religion and goverment people got burned at the stake. as a straight woman I could go outside right now and marry any man off the street just because, but a gay couple together for 40 years can't. Its not legal, its not moral, and its not right to deny them this right.
01:54 PM on 12/26/2011
All way, way off track. This isn't about religion, it's about the core definition of marriage (or linguistic equivalent) as held and practiced by all societies of all times, of any religion or no religion: committed male-female union.

Likewise, it's not about a "piece of paper." That piece of paper is token acknowledgement that a couple have entered the estate that society and its law recognize and accept as a marriage.

I have been in an intimately close, loving relationship with my children for well north of 40 years. Can we claim a marriage?
01:01 AM on 12/13/2011
I do not agree with gay marriage. That being said, I also don't agree with how these men were treated. Breaks my heart.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
willowraven
It must be something in the water!!
07:53 PM on 12/12/2011
This was very sad to read, it's time for USA to step up and give equal rights to all the American people, not just a few. This is just plain stupid to deny gays to marry, and it affects the hetrosexuals not at all.
06:11 PM on 12/12/2011
I see all these comments about how it's time for the gay community to slash and burn and defeat Obama because he doesn't do everything the gay community wants.

So gets say you get your way, and Romney or Gingrich become president. You will have a republican congress that unlike president Obama... will not even try to fight for your rights. As many as three Supreme Court justices will also be chosen by the next president. I guess you also want a right wing court that will probably uphold all the marriage bans that are making their way throughout the country. Check, the way the GOP has become so extreme lately... they might even try to ban your life style all together. You heard santorum... and he isnt even THAT extreme compared to the rest of them.

Perhaps you hadn't actually thought it through this far.... maybe this will allowed you sonera pause before you throw your entire future down te drain on a tantrum.
07:21 PM on 12/12/2011
Please excuse my phone's autocorrect! It likes to change my words.. but you can make out what i'm saying.
02:51 PM on 12/26/2011
Neither you nor your device has "thought it through" . . . or you would not entrust your thoughts to a device that not only doesn't think, but doesn't allow you to.

Among the candidates on the right, each is more atrocious than the last. Never have I more needed to hold my nose than in having to plunge my hand into their cesspool to retrieve the pure gold principle of the committed male-female union that alone is marriage.

But that's what I have to do, because I will not allow the fraudsters -- of whatever political party -- to bury the real thing in the mud and pass off their counterfeit under the name of marriage!

Of course it's the people's right to decide how "marriage" is defined. But the SSM pushers won't accept that constitutonal principle either, because beyond railroading SSM legislation, they keep exerting themselves to thwart the nationwide pushback of the people against SSM.

What issue in history has prompted so many state constitutional amendments, repeals of legislation, unseating of judges, etc., as SSM, railroaded through when the people were caught off guard, wearied with crises related to the economy? Once they wake up to the burglary and debasing of their values by SSM, there will be even more pushback

Whichever way the people's decision goes, I have faith they will sooner or later wake up and realize they've been defrauded. Then will come the tidal wave that will sweep away those SSM constructions of sand.
01:08 PM on 12/12/2011
I don't understand how people can claim marriage is just an unimportant piece of paper, then in the next sentence talk about how it would be "bad" if same-sex couples got it.
11:08 AM on 12/12/2011
A country that can send men off to war for no good, trumped up reasons, but deny folks the right to love and marry for love, the right reasons, is in deep @#!%!
09:53 AM on 12/12/2011
Sad. I think marriage is a universal right. To deny it is wrong.
07:52 AM on 12/12/2011
Waiting 40 years for the world to change? How about doing what our ancestors did when the local environment stopped providing -- pack up and head for greener pastures.
11:17 AM on 12/12/2011
The world has changed. The American legal system refuses to. America will follow the path of resistence, just as we did with interracial marriage, causing unnecessary suffering to people every day.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Erin84
02:14 AM on 12/12/2011
Just in the interest of honesty: I don't know that prop 8 or the barring of same sex marriage in California was why the surviving partner could not get retirement benefits. There are still domestic partnerships and ways to name a beneficiary in that state. That being said, that still does not excuse gay couples being treated less by having an inferior system of partner recognition. There are loopholes in the domestic partnership and civil union laws in some states. Also, if theoretically, the government makes it a system with supposedly the same benefits, the logic in giving it a different name then becomes either that 1) politicians are bowing to the prejudices of those who view gay couples as less able to be loving and devoted and moral than straight couples or 2) bowing to those who feel civil law should reflect doctrines of predominant religions. Gay people do have the same ability to love and commit, and this nation has separation of church and state and there is no legal precedent that says laws have to agree with dogma. Laws have to follow the Constitution and have some valid purpose for the public. The deceased partner clearly wanted his state government to remove this precedent of placing gays in a lesser status before he died. That in and of itself, obviously meant a lot to him, as it does to many many LGBT people.
09:12 PM on 12/11/2011
This story truly breaks my heart!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Barbara0817
1onepass
08:16 PM on 12/11/2011
This has nothing to do withlaw and everything to do with sad story
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
artandcolour
out and proud far left liberal gay starving artist
01:58 AM on 12/12/2011
you are just wrong about that. all this couple wanted to do, after FORTY years of being a couple was to marry. They could not get married because of the LAW. Now they never will.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AJ in ATL
33 years of being a Liberal and proud of it!!!
07:50 PM on 12/11/2011
It is disgusting how we treat the LBGT community esspecially when it comes to matters like this. Because of conservatives vilification of gay couples it ok to discriminate against them. This couple was married in mind, body, and soul and I hope he becomes a mayrter that can cause true change so future couples can enjoy the legal protections that they deserve!
07:12 PM on 12/11/2011
Im sorry this man died with a sad heart but, if he died because he was denied medical attention, then I could see why it would be a story.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
syl1969
04:04 PM on 12/13/2011
He died being denied a basic human right - that IS a story
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
practiceempathy
Tolerance need not yield to willful ignorance.
12:00 PM on 12/15/2011
Wow. You're really shallow.
01:05 PM on 12/15/2011
not really