Right: Deval Patrick
It seems that same-sex marriage has already become so blasé that the incremental removal of barriers no longer calls for front-page headlines. Americans met the news of another breakthrough for gay marriage -- Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick’s signing of a bill revoking a law that had barred out-of-state same-sex couples from getting married -- with a yawn. Then they rolled over and went to sleep when L.A. police chief William Bratton declared that Lindsay Lohan had “gone gay."
Yep, it’s just another Week in Gay.
Though the Massachusetts story got good coverage nationally, with major papers such as The Boston Globe and The New York Times and wire services picking it up, the response seemed less urgent than May's coverage of California’s breakthrough court decision and New York governor David Paterson’s subsequent order that state agencies must recognize same-sex marriages conducted in other states. (As expected, there’s a footnote to Paterson’s actions: According to The New York Sun , the state supreme court is considering whether it will hear a case brought by the Arizona-based Christian group the Alliance Defense Fund, which is suing Paterson based on the dictionary definition of the word marriage and claiming that Paterson’s order was an illegal breach of separation of power.)
The Massachusetts bill that Patrick signed revokes a 1913 law originally intended to keep interracial couples from marrying, a law then-governor Mitt Romney defiantly revived in 2004 after same-sex marriage was made legal in the state.
In a Fox News story, Governor Patrick noted wryly: "In five years now, … the sky has not fallen, the earth has not opened to swallow us all up, and more to the point, thousands and thousands of good people -- contributing members of our society -- are able to make free decisions about their personal future, and we ought to seek to affirm that every chance we can."
More proof that the personal is political: Gay couples tying the knot are using their nuptials as a way to get the word out about the upcoming California ballot initiative in November. An AP wire story notes that couples are using inventive ploys such as putting “Vote No on 8” on cake toppers, or accepting donations toward the No on 8 campaign in lieu of gifts.
Which may be needed, according to The Wall Street Journal, which reported that California gay marriage opponents have thus far raised more funds than gay rights organizers.
“Proponents of Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that would ban same-sex marriage, raised about $3.7 million from January 1 through June 30, according to state filings," the article stated. "In contrast, gay rights activists who oppose the measure raised about $2.5 million through June 30.”
However, according to a story by Julie Bolcer for Advocate.com, published the same day as the WSJ article, gay rights groups had raised $4.1 million compared to the proponents' $3.7 million -- a figure confirmed with the secretary of state. This puts opponents of the measure squarely in the lead in fund-raising, and -- as only 41% of Californians said they are planning to vote for the initiative, according to a July Field poll -- in popular opinion as well.
These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.
If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.
All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.
See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.
Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.
Home | Contact | Current Issue | LGBT Community Partners | Staff
Jobs | Help
Subscribe: Print Edition Digital Edition | Subscriber Services: Print Edition Digital Edition
Visit our Websites
Out.com | OutTraveler.com | HIVPlusMag.com | Alyson.com | HereTV.com | GayWired.com | SheWired.com
Privacy Policy | User Agreement | Community Guidelines | Legal Notice
Advocate.com © 2009 Regent Entertainment Media Inc. All Rights Reserved.
