2008 Woodie Awards
Love, but no legal marriage?
Same-sex couples apply for marriage licenses
Allie Hostler
Issue date: 2/13/08 Section: News
|
This fairy tale magic isn't entirely possible for same-sex couples, not in 49 states at least. California law, and the law in 48 other states, prohibits same-sex couples from being legally married.
Jamila Pharp and Michelle Hasting didn't wait for the law to decide the fate of their fairy tale. The Eureka couple was married in a private ceremony in 1999 and was legally married in Canada in 2006, but the state and federal government don't recognize their union, denying them 1,338 rights that are afforded to married couples in the United States.
"What we are asking for is equality under the law," Pharp said. Pharp is a stay-at-home mom and the national outreach and coalition director for Marriage Equality U.S.A.
This Valentine's Day, members of Marriage Equality U.S.A. (MEUSA) continue their decade-long fight to change California and U.S. law. They plan to draw attention to their civil rights plight by requesting marriage licenses at 21 county records offices throughout California on the national day of love.
Stan Smith-Hanes said he knows exactly what the Humboldt County records clerks will say.
"We're sorry, at this time marriage is between a man and a woman," he said. Smith-Hanes is the leader of the Humboldt County chapter of MEUSA, a 24-chapter organization that operates in California, Washington, Iowa, New York and Pennsylvania. Their goal is to secure legally recognized civil marriage equality, at the federal and state level, without regard to gender identity or sexual orientation.
In 2000, 60 percent of California voters passed Proposition 22, a law that prevents the state from recognizing same-sex marriages performed outside California's jurisdiction. Language added following Proposition 22's passage clarified that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
"It's unconstitutional," Smith-Hanes said, citing equality and civil rights as leverage.
Interpretation of the law is still questionable. After a law suit was filed in response to Proposition 22, California courts have reviewed its constitutionality. The issue now rests in the California Supreme Court's hands. They are expected to release an opinion this year.
Smith-Hanes said California legislators believe in giving the same rights to same-sex couples, but they don't want to call it marriage. "They are hung up on that word, 'marriage,' he said. "Despite lawful domestic partnerships same-sex couples are still being treated separately."
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 7
Randall
posted 2/19/08 @ 3:08 AM PST
If the voters had approved gay marriage, I'd be fine with that because I really don't care one way or the other. My opinion of homosexual couples gaining legal marriage status hasn't counted for anything since 2000, when Prop 22 was put before the public in a democratic fashion. (Continued…)
hosallie
Allie Hostler
posted 2/19/08 @ 10:12 AM PST
You have a good point Randall, but lets not forget about this group's right to challenge the constitutionality of laws. We all have the right to defend our rights--however we interpret them--at all levels of our court system. (Continued…)
Randall
posted 2/19/08 @ 10:40 PM PST
Allie, your point about defending our rights brings up the question of from where our rights come. The Declaration of Independence states that our unalienable rights are endowed upon us by our Creator, and that Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. (Continued…)
Randall
posted 5/09/08 @ 5:11 PM PST
Comparing the civil-rights struggle of non-whites to the marriage-equality struggle of non-heterosexual couples is bogus. Blacks were restricted from or had limited physical access to certain facilities, were counted as 3/5 of a person at the ballot, and were forced to give up their seat on a bus of a white person wanted to sit there, among many other things. (Continued…)
Post a Comment