eruthros: Delenn from Babylon 5 with a startled expression and the text "omg!" (Default)
[personal profile] eruthros
Video of the steps outside the CA Supreme Court as the decision was announced: here.

Video of Mayor Gavin Newsom's press conference here. It's hard to hear, but look at that crowd, look at the reaction, man. (You remember him; he was the one who told the city of San Francisco to issue same-sex marriage licenses in 2004 -- the film crew that was around that day made a video called Pursuit of Equality, trailer available here; it also makes me sniffly.1)

There's a neat slideshow at the San Jose Mercury News here; picture 15 is the SF City Hall, filled with people.

And I dunno if you remember this, but this past winter New York ruled that all out of state marriages must be recognized in New York. Which means, if you're a New York resident, and you get married in Massachusetts or California or Canada, your employer here in NY has to give you benefits.

Dear San Francisco City Attorney, dear Lambda Legal, dear ACLU, dear NCLR, dear Equality California: thanks. You guys are awesome.

1. For maximum sniffles: Vienna Teng's City Hall (here), a narrative song about a couple getting married in San Francisco in 2004. And it's topical, because the 2004 marriage in SF led, over the last four years, to this: many of the couples who got married then brought the suit against the state that resulted in this overturn. Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin, the very first couple to be married in San Francisco in 2004 (in the first picture under Thursday here), were part of the suit.

Date: 2008-05-15 11:14 pm (UTC)
ext_2208: image of romaine brooks self-portrait, text "Lila Futuransky" (Default)
From: [identity profile]
And Jewelle Gomez, writer of the best lesbian vampire stores ever, is in that first video! Yay!

(I am anti-marriage in general for all kinds of reasons equality doesn't fix, of course, but this stuff still makes me sniffly. I cried many tears in 2004...)

Date: 2008-05-15 11:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile]
You might like this point, made on ( - "The Court did not rule that California must allow same-sex couples the right to enter into "marriage." It merely ruled that if the state allows opposite-sex couples to do so, then same-sex couples must be treated equally. The Court explicitly left open the possibility that the state could distinguish between "marriage" (as a religious institution) and "civil unions" (as a secular institution) -- i.e., that California law could leave the definition of "marriage" to religious institutions and only offer and recognize "civil unions" for legal purposes -- provided that it treated opposite-sex and same-sex couples equally. The key legal issue is equal treatment by the State as a secular matter, not defining "marriage" for religious purposes."

Date: 2008-05-16 12:31 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile]
Fantastic news! I cheered when I heard :).

Date: 2008-05-16 11:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile]
perfect timing!


eruthros: Delenn from Babylon 5 with a startled expression and the text "omg!" (Default)

May 2017

2829 3031   

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 24th, 2017 07:30 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios