First Comes Love, Then Comes Marriage

I wish I had said that. How poetic! Was it Walt Whitman? No. Was it a greeting card? No. Was it my mother? I can't remember. Then who said it?

It was Macy's! Yes, Macy's department store, where I worked as Santa's little helper the good fairy -- I swear that's what I was called -- when I moved to New York in 1962.

Last week, Macy's took out a full-page ad in the Los Angeles Times that said: "And now it's a milestone every couple in California can celebrate. Let Macy's Wedding Gift & Registry help you start a new life together."

How lovely. My partner, Diane Olson, and I have been together for 15 years, so we don't need a toaster (although my friend Alison Arngrim and her husband, Bob, sent us a pink one, our first wedding gift). We have two sets of silverware and all the plates we will ever need -- unless there's is another earthquake. (We live in one block from Northridge, home of the great quake of 1994.)

So what do we want for our wedding?

We want the conservative Republican governors of other states to mind their own business! On May 29, the attorneys general of the states of Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah filed a brief requesting modification of the California Supreme Court decision to allow same-sex couples from other states to come to California to get married. These Governors want the marriages to be put off until after the November elections, when California voters will (if the measure qualifies) vote on a measure that would ban same-sex marriage.

What about the Republican mantra "states rights"? What about the fact that three of the four California Supreme Court judges who ruled in our favor were appointed by Republican governors?

California's attorney general, Jerry Brown, says that same-sex marriages should not be delayed, and our Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, is against the proposed constitutional amendment that would limit marriage to one man and one woman.

As a matter of fact, a majority of Californians (51 per cent) now supports same-sex marriage! Only 42 per cent disapprove. But 62 per cent of born-again Christians in California oppose permitting gay and lesbian couples to marry. I don't mind these 62 per cent being born again, but why did they have to come back as themselves?

Sixty-nine per cent of Republicans in California disapprove, while Democrats approve allowing same sex couples to marry by a margin of 2-1 (65 percent-29 percent).

Governors, are you worried that lesbians and gay men are going to stampede into California to get married and then try to force your states to recognize them as equal citizens?

In a letter to California Chief Justice Ronald George, the attorneys general said that California allowing same-sex marriages could unnecessarily open the door to legal challenges from gay residents of other states who get married in California. Upon returning to their home states, the newlyweds could demand equality in everything from tax-filing status to testimonial privileges in civil suits. What a disaster that would be! Equality in other states!

Of course, according to the Human Rights Campaign, 44 states have either a law or a constitutional amendment (or both) barring same-sex marriage, most of which explicitly deny acknowledgment of other states' same-sex ceremonies.

And supporters of same-sex marriages say they are not pushing for gay couples to come to California in droves or asking out-of -state newlyweds to attempt to challenge state laws when they get home. (Of course, several gay attorneys asked Diane and I not to sue in California for the right to marry, on the grounds that our fight might fail (which it did not) or trigger a constitutional amendment (which it did, but the odds are now on our side that it will not pass).

Where I absolutely agree with these attorneys is that we should not undertake a federal lawsuit. It took 19 years for inter-racial marriage to be approved by the U.S. Supreme Court after the California Supreme Court struck down the ban on it in 1948. So I agree that, especially with the present federal Supreme Court, now is not the time to push the issue federally.

To be honest, I do have lesbian friends who are planning to come to California to be married. Cathy and Phyllis, who live in Flagstaff, Arizona, want to join two New York couples -- Jan and Edrie from Cherry Grove and Ann and Carlotta of the Pines -- as well as Marilyn and Sandi, who live in Los Osos, California, and Jean and Marilyn from Los Angeles. They are working on having a beautiful wedding on the beach. I'm not going to tell Cathy and Phyllis: "You can't come to California to get married because it will drive your Republican governor crazy."

I don't think they're thinking about their governor right now. They're probably thinking about a caterer and about exactly what they need to do to get married in California.

Rev. Dr. Cindi Love of Dallas, Texas, and her partner of 28 years, Sue Jennings, are coming to California to get married on June 24. Rev Love is the Executive Director of Metropolitan Community Churches, the first and largest church organization with a primary outreach to gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people in the world! Cindi and Sue have two grown children, Joshua and Hanna Love.

Metropolitan Community Churches has performed so many "marriages" that I bet Cindy and Sue know what to do. However, it's a puzzle for those of us who have never been married.

Diane and I don't even know how much it will cost. We have gone to the Beverly Hills Courthouse to get married during Valentine's Day week every year since 2001. But because we knew we would be turned down, we didn't even bring a check or what we thought night be enough cash.

Luckily for us, Marriage Equality USA, an organization that has supported and fought for same-sex marriage for a long time, has put out a terrific online recourse called the "We're Getting Married Tool Kit." It provides information on how to announce wedding plans in local papers, a list of county clerks' offices in California, and a lot of other helpful advice. The website for this wonderful information is here. Click on "Download your Getting Married Tool Kit here" and you get a beginners' manual for marriage.

I need to warn you in advance that it doesn't suggest what to wear. Macy's might have some suggestions, but there will be many in our community who will not want traditional wedding gowns and tuxedos. Diane and I both feel we are way beyond wearing "virginal white," so we're planning to wear matching tan suits. We're hoping to get married on M Day (Marriage Day), Tuesday, June 17, which is now set as the first day same-sex marriages will be possible in California. Our plans are to exchange vows at 9 a.m. in front of the Beverly Hills Courthouse in a ceremony officiated by Rabbi Denise Eger, who wants to meet with us. (I don't think she is going to ask if we are truly committed.) Of course, everyone who supports us is invited!

Please, bigots, give us this one day. I remember when you used to yell "Homosexuality is a disease" at us. To which I replied: "If homosexuality is a disease, we should all call in sick to work! 'Hi, can't work, still queer.'" But those days are long gone. Most people no longer consider us "sick." In most states, we are just considered "less then deserving."

So, here's what I say to lesbian and gay couples everywhere: If you want to get married, don't let anyone stop you. California is a great place to be gay, and if you want to move here, our property prices have dropped drastically. Besides, people are predicting it is going to add hundreds of millions of dollars to our economy.

And for those of you in our community, or friends of our community, who do not want to come here to get married, or to ever get married, please give us this present: Find out the telephone numbers of the Republican governors of the 10 states that filed to have our marriages stopped, pass their phone numbers to everyone you know and encourage them to call the governors' offices and say: "Stop trying to delay when same-sex couples can begin to be married in California. Just mind your own business. Use what little time we hope you have left in office, governor, to control inflation, the loss of jobs, homes and the skyrocketing prices of gas, food, and health insurance in your state and other really important problems. Love is not the problem, love is the solution."

Yes, first comes love, then comes marriage. And if you can't believe Macy's department store, whom can you believe?

Comments

[rw808]

OK, let's review.

Does ANYONE recall how interracial marriage was finally made legal in all of the US?

That's right. The SUPREME COURT issued a ruling in the Lovings vs. Virginia case.

If it had been left to the good graces of American voters, it would have never been made legal. At the time of the decision, almost 70% of US voters were AGAINST interracial marriage.

The current decision is couched very carefully in equal protection terms. Equal protection is a central concept to the California Constitution, and to selectively deny it to lawful citizens of California, you have to have a legitimate, rational reason.

Those who are against same-sex marriage cannot give a legitimate, rational reason to deny two unrelated adults the right to enter into a legal contract called a "marriage" governing mutual care and property rights and responsibilities just because those two adults are of the same sex. It is simply extending an EXISTING legal arrangement, not creating a NEW one (which a "marriage" of two or more adults would be).

And I am still hopeful that California's attorney general will look at the upcoming initiative and, correctly, rule it ILLEGAL, since it effectively makes the Equal Protection Clause of the California Constitution explicitly NOT apply to a certain "suspect class" of adults, namely gays and lesbians. And that is patently against the letter of the Constitution. Which exists to protect everyone from tyranny-- including tyranny of the ignorant, bigoted majority.

[rant75]

The California "not so" Supreme Court stole voting rights from the entire state of California.

Even a state as Liberal/Socialist as Cali voted twice against allowing state recognised same sex marriage, and the court said their voices don't matter!!

After all, this is only a democracy. Why should voters count?

[StephenDedalus82]

What if the referendum drives enough conservatives to the polls in November to give McCain California?

[rayanthony]

Next big thing in California will be:

"Why can't I marry 3 women?" or "Why can't I marry my dog?"

Ah yes, the "great" state of California!!

[doodlefarbe]

rayanthony writes, asks, "Next big thing in California will be: "Why can't I marry 3 women?" or "Why can't I marry my dog?""

As for the latter question, the answer is obviously, "because your dog does not have the legal capacity to consent to the contract".

As for the former question..­. ...I don't have an answer. Why not?

[rayanthony]

The California "not so" Supreme Court stole voting rights from the entire state of California.

Even a state as Liberal/Socialist as Cali voted twice against allowing state recognised same sex marriage, and the court said their voices don't matter!!

After all, this is only a democracy. Why should voters count?

[samguy]

In the last paragraph Robin writes:

Use what little time we hope you have left in office, governor, to control inflation, the loss of jobs, homes and the skyrocketing prices of gas, food, and health insurance in your state and other really important problems.

C'mon now Robin, are you expecting to do REAL work?

Mazel tov to you and Diane!

[Kashchei]

I was at the Northampton courthouse on M-day in Massachusetts by sheer coincidence (I was involved in a lawsuit at the time). The overwhelming sense of joy exuded by all those about to be married was so contagious that this is one of my favorite memories. I wish same-sex marriage opponents could have been there with me; I think the experience would have softened their hearts just a bit.

[Bookman51]

I'm straight, I'm Californian, I've been married thirty-five years, and three months to the day. I love my wife, and always have. No one appreciates marriage more than I do. No one is a bigger booster of the institution of marrriage than I am. Of course gay people ought to be able to get married just like straight people. Instead of blurring or confounding marriage, it simplifies and clarifies it. No more civil unions or commitment ceremonies, whatever those are, whatever they mean. Two people are married: we all know what that means.

[ICUP]

Why only two people? Suppose I am a Muslim and have four willing women who all want to wed me, why should we not be able to make it legal?

The bottom line is that the government needs to get out of the marriage game because it is not the business of the State. End all extra rights and tax breaks granted to married people, then let people engage in private marriage without any government imprimatur.

[Bookman51]

When the government, by and through an initiative constitutional amendment, says marriage is a union only between a man and a woman, it is IN the "marriage game" as you put it. I'm trying to keep government out, at least by that much. A vote against the upcoming ballot proposition doesn't give anybody any extra rights or tax breaks. A vote against that proposition will help keep government off the backs of gay people.

[ccortezz]

As a gay man in a committed relationship of 15 years I have no desire to get married, but I will fight for those in our community that chose to be married. Looking forward to the Celebration at Dolores Park in S.F. followed by the Dyke march into the Castro on Pink Saturday.

[Bookman51]

You should get married. If you're truly committed, if you two intend to be together for the rest of your lives, then get married. I'm old-fashioned about marriage. I'm not a big fan of "living together." Like it or not, your commitment makes a statement to the world. It says you're in love but you have a bag packed, just in case. It says your temporary arrangement has been renewed repeatedly, but something is still holding you back. It says your relationship has been great up till now, but tomorrow?--who knows? Marriage is a risk. It's a leap of faith. And both feet have to leave the floor, that's for damn sure. And for half the couples, it doesn't work out. But it's a statement that says, among other things, you don't have that bag packed, just in case, because in your case, you don't need one.

[rangem]

ban all gay marrages period

[rant75]

Great post.....S­imple and to the point!!

[Camel54]

First, I think it's great that Nelly Olsen sent you a toaster. I have a great image of her picking one out from the mercantile while old Mrs. Olsen has a hissy about Nelly being seen with the gays. Good stuff.

Second, right wingers riding their protecting­-the-sanct­ity-of-mar­riage need to look at some of the laws they've created and maintained for other citizens before judging others so sycophantically. For example, the widow of a veteran can never marry or she will lose the death benefits, including health care, owed to her by the state for her husbands service to his country--same with genders switched. This leads thousands of our grandmothers and grandfathers to carry on in a most sinful manner with each other because if they married, like God wants, they wouldn't be able to LIVE!

[sdskelton03]

For me, its not about "hate."

Although I am against gay marriage, I really don't care very much. I don't think the world will end.

What I am against is using the courts to usher in the era of gay marriage.

If courts are just going to make law anyway, lets get rid of the legislature and make those worthless bastards go get real jobs.

[ccortezz]

The courts don't seem to bother people like you when they vote in your favor. The Courts are there to protect minorities from discrimination of the majority.

[sdskelton03]

I always cheer for the courts to rule in favor of the constitution.

To advance my political objectives, I call my representatives in the congress or state house.

There is no right to marry someone of your own gender anywhere in the constitution. Any argument you make for it could just as well apply to me marrying my sister. (for the record, I have no interest in that lest anyone accuse.)

[SouthpawSass]

As a heterosexual, married, mother of three, I'd like to let all you same sex married/soon to be married/liked to be married couples know that if my marriage of 23 years goes bust, my husband and I shall not hold any of you personally responsible.

You're welcome. ;)

[TJinSoCal]

Great article! As a gay man in CA, I couldn't be more excited and proud of being a Californian.

But don't mininterpret that 51% poll. It doesn't mean that the majority is in favor of gay marriage, it only means that the majority is not in favor of messing with the state constitution. The numbers are different when the question is rephrased.

Right now our best bet of beating this stupid amendment is to have an overwhelming number of wedding ceremonies between June 17 and November, creating a positive, celebratory atmosphere. Our governator has strong Hollywood roots, can you imagine him presiding over one of the weddings?

And Obama running a strong campaign will be the final nail in the coffin of the marriage amendment.

[Dave24]

Our government protects the rights of individuals, not "ideals." All people have a right to marry whomever they want. Some bigots (Huckabee, most evangelicals, those who are republican-leaning) even equate homosexuality with beastiality, for which they should be ashamed.

Even though it's absurd, let's entertain this stupid idea, which can be deflated by a single point: animals don't pay taxes.

People do not hide behind their religion, nor use it as a way to act homophobic. Rather, the religion teaches and explicitly states that it's sinful, making scripture itself, in a sweet twist of irony, the sinner.

Consider the church (any church) like a big fraternity. If they don't want to marry someone (or a particular group), fine. But they have no right telling the *government* that it isn't allowed; and anyone who believes our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters and *fellow citizens who are protected under the Constitution* have no right to marry should wake from their vile sleep.

Anyone who denies the rights of others for any reason should be ashamed and ridiculed to no end. Do not accept the bigotry of others, and do not let our government embrace their hatred.

[doodlefarbe]

Dave 24 writes, "Even though it's absurd, let's entertain this stupid idea, which can be deflated by a single point: animals don't pay taxes."

Um... I'd use a different point to deflate the dumb animal idea. Especially when you consider that many people also do not pay taxes. You don't want to take away their marriage priviledge, do you, just because they don't pay taxes?

Better argument is simply that animals do not have the capacity to give legal consent to the arrangement. People (taxpaying or not) of legal age, do.