Four civil rights groups filed briefs with the California supreme court last week, arguing that the state violates its own constitution by denying same-sex couples the right to marry. The American Civil Liberties Union, Equality California, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and Lambda Legal filed the briefs for the coordinated marriage cases now before the court in response to the state’s defense of the discriminatory law.
Appellants in earlier cases asserted that same-sex couples do not have the right to marry under due process of the law because marriage, by definition, is between a man and a woman. The brief argues that the state’s prohibition of same-sex marriage infringes on basic rights and discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation and gender.
Another argument that the brief counters is the presumption that marriage is intended for procreation. However, the groups state that the elderly, infertile people, or those who cannot procreate have the right to marry as long as they are heterosexual, but gays and lesbians do not.
The court agreed to hear the case in 2006 after the state’s court of appeal reversed a decision by a San Francisco superior court judge who ruled that banning same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.
Lambda Legal senior counsel Jennifer Pizer said in a statement that anything less than marriage is a “confusing twilight zone” for gay and lesbian couples. “We know this because we answer the distress calls every day—calls that began with the first statewide domestic partner bill in 1999 and haven’t slowed as the law broadened over the years. To the contrary, the distress calls have increased as more couples register, hoping to shield their families, and encounter inconsistent, incomplete protections. We’ve welcomed the supreme court’s invitation to explain how far domestic partnerships fall short of full marriage.”
"By design," the brief reads, "domestic partnership is a functional status for providing legal benefits to same-sex couples while withholding the unique government approbation and support conveyed by marriage. Predictably, this creates a barrier that makes it difficult for others to understand, to respect, or to see lesbian and gay men's committed relationships as similar to their own. As the court of appeal rightly observed [in Knight v. Superior Court, 2005], 'the legislature has not...granted domestic partners the same statutes as marries spouses.'"
Equality California executive director Geoff Kors also said that marriage helps to validate relationships. “We have already learned that domestic partnerships and civil unions cannot replace the critical legal protections, universal recognition, and dignity that marriage affords," he said. "Excluding same-sex couples from marriage denies countless couples legal recognition of the love they share.”
More than 250 religious and civil rights organizations will also file amicus briefs in support of same-sex marriage on September 17; some include the National Black Justice Coalition, the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, and the California Council of Churches. (The Advocate)
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.
Be the first to comment on this story.
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.
