Bruce Paine wrote me an email all about how I should really be writing about this Prop 8 nonsense in California. For those who don't know, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, which was on the ballot in November, and which defined marriage as between one man and one woman. The same Supreme Court had called marriage an "inalienable civil right" one year ago, and legalized gay marriage in the process. The 18,000 couples who were married between that ruling and the November election are still married, but the rest of us are currently out of luck.
Part of my hesitance to write thus far has been due to the fact that my friend Cate has been here visiting, and now Christine's aunt is visiting us, too. So I've been hanging out, being the hostess and tour guide on the island. But I also didn't know what to say after the ruling came down on Tuesday. I was eating lunch in a cafe in Old San Juan, and Cate had her phone reloading the CNN website, while I went back and forth between CNN.com and the Los Angeles NBC site. None of these sites were providing us with info quickly enough, so I went to the Los Angeles ABC website, and the breaking news at the top of the page read, "Supreme Court upholds Prop 8." And that's when I ordered a drink.
Bruce Paine's email mentioned the legal rulings, and the way in which these things have been done in the past with other minority groups. And I'm sure there are precedents to be cited and cases to be made. I don't know a lot about the legal intricacies, and I suppose I could learn, but I just can't get over the fact that this has to be discussed at all. I can't get past the human aspect of all of this, and the fact that it took thousands of motivated Mormons (and others) to convince voters that gays are evil and will molest children if allowed to marry. I just can't get past all of these people spending so much time and money to work on something that doesn't affect their lives in the least. I want them to look at these girls here...

...and tell me what it is that is so threatening about them being allowed to get married. Is it my bandana? Do you not like our sunglasses? Do you see our lust for the private parts of children, as well as our desires to destroy heterosexual marriages the world over? Please, TELL ME WHAT IT IS.
The whole thing seems so simple to me, and so obvious, that it's hard for me to think about anything other than the human angle. I had a teacher who used to tell me all the time that man is inherently good, and I've always tried to believe that because I'm not interested in being a full-time pessimist. But having people go on television and yell at me about how dangerous I am for society makes that faith in humanity all the more difficult to maintain. And when they go to the polls en masse to actually take away my rights, that faith starts hanging off the window ledge by just one pinky finger. It's almost gone, people.
But, I still have a little bit more to say, particularly about the specifics of the ruling. This might actually be my favorite part:
Thus, except with respect to the designation of 'marriage,' any measure that treats individuals or couples differently on the basis of their sexual orientation continues to be constitutionally 'suspect' under the state equal protection clause and may be upheld only if the measure satisfies the very stringent strict-scrutiny standard of review that also applies to measures that discriminate on the basis of race, gender, or religion.
In other words, gay couples are exactly equal to everyone else, "except" in this one way. The court will protect us in other ways, but not when it comes to marriage. Last I checked, equal means completely equal. No exceptions. Someone once coined a term for what this is; "separate but equal" comes to mind. Another part of the ruling fully solidifies the fact that the court is all about making sure things stay separate but equal:
All three branches of state government continue to have the duty...to eliminate the remaining important differences between marriage and domestic partnership, both in substance and perception. The measure puts one solution beyond reach by prohibiting the state from naming future same-sex unions 'marriages,' but it does not otherwise affect the state's obligation to enforce the equal protection clause by protecting the 'fundamental right...of same-sex couples to have their official family relationship accorded the same dignity, respect, and stature as that accorded to all other official recognized family relationships.' ...
For the state to meet its obligations under the equal protection clause will now be more difficult, but the obligation remains.
For the state to meet its obligations under the equal protection clause will now be more difficult, but the obligation remains.
Well, thanks for that. "Let's get this separate but equal thing right, okay? I mean, we've just made it really hard for gay people to get their fundamental rights, but you still have to do it, okay?"
Oh, and I'll tell you one of the most important differences between domestic partnerships and marriage. On March 3, 2009, I was officially "domestic partnered" to Christine. Guess when I'm allowed to be covered under her health insurance? Not until September 3, 2009. If she had married a man, he would have been covered as soon as the paperwork had been completed. But I have to wait six months. And the insurance company can do this because, as the representative told me when I called to bitch, "domestic partnership isn't real marriage."
But I digress. The great part about the ruling is that the court seemingly has no problem calling a right inalienable one year, and then the very next year upholding a ballot measure that takes away that same right. That seems odd, but I'm no constitutional scholar.
Hey, but you know who is? One Mr. Barack Obama. Guys, I don't know what to feel about our president right now. I was all for him before the election, and I loved him, even while knowing that he didn't support gay marriages (just civil unions). I guess I thought maybe he'd change his mind when he got into office. He's all about change, right? And, he claimed he was going to do something about the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, so he's at least somewhat supportive of the gays.
The CA Supreme Court had announced last week that it would be making this announcement on Tuesday at 10am Pacific time. So an hour before, Obama decided to announce his pick of Sotomayor as his nomination to the Supreme Court. Confirmation hearings don't start for at least a month, but it was that important for him to make sure the word was out there on Tuesday morning, shortly before 10am. Seems a little weird, right? Well, not when you consider what happened for the rest of the day. Every time I logged on to CNN.com, the huge front page story was Sotomayor. It took effort to find the Prop 8 story, and a huge part of me believes that was exactly what Obama wanted. He wanted to dominate the news cycle and avoid having to tell his base that he, too, believes in "separate but equal."
This is a little bit hard to deal with. A while back, I posted a video featuring Lieutenant Dan Choi, who was discharged from the Army National Guard because he told The Rachel Maddow Show that he's gay. People have circulated petitions, Choi has made televised appeals, and still there has been no word from Obama on what he will do about the policy. The gay community is getting pretty riled up over this, as we should, since we helped elect this guy and now he's acting like a normal oily politician.
Last night, Obama spoke at a DNC fundraiser at the Beverly Hills Hilton. As you probably know, there is a large gay population in the Los Angeles area, so there was a bit of a protest. Strangely, there isn't a lot of news coverage about this. Why would there be? The best I can find is this video on CNN about Lt. Choi, which has a few shots of the protest at the Hilton. But that's it. And no word from our president, either. I can't quite give up on Obama, but I'm getting close. And I don't think I'm the only one.
I posted this video once before, but I want to do it again.
(bonus points if you know what the title of this post references)











