California Faultline

Wisconsin law criminalizes gay marriage, but is okay with marrying your first cousin.

“America’s Dairyland” (aka Wisconsin) is so opposed to gay marriage that in 2006 they changed their constitution to specify marriage could only be between a man and a woman. Combine this with a decades old law making it a criminal offense to get married across state lines if the marriage would be considered illegal at home, and you could have a lot of outlaw gay farmers on your hands.

While the law was passed decades ago to prevent underage couples from crossing state lines to marry it could be used against same-sex couples the Madison Capital Times reported Wednesday.

The penalty is a fine of up to $10,000, nine months in prison, or both. [from 365Gay.com]

Oh, Wisconsin. Not a big fan of the gays, but their marriage laws provide some hope for those who want to keep it in the family. From the Milwaukee County Clerk’s Marriage License Brochure:

No marriage shall be contracted between persons who are nearer of kin than second cousins, except that marriage may be contracted between first cousins where the female has attained the age of 55 years or either party has documented proof of sterilization.

The New York Times looks to Massachusetts to for a forecast of what California can expect.

There are devoted couples who have decided marriage is not for them, couples whose lawyers or accountants advised them against marrying, and couples in which one partner wants to marry but the other does not.

In short: gay marriage is no different than straight marriage. But there are some lessons to be learned from the Puritan State, which legalized gay marriage 4 years ago.

For one, after an initial rush, the number of gay marriages has dropped signifigantly. Likewise, there have been a high number of divorces by gay married couples.

…some people rushed to get married without thinking it through just because they could. It was an incredibly heady historical moment, and some people probably made the decision hastily.

Surprising details:

And while nearly half of straight people marrying are under 30, more same-sex married couples of both sexes are older — nearly a third are in their 40s.

Could this be because longtime “partners” had been waiting so long to get legally married?

Lawyers say same-sex couples are more likely to draw up prenuptial agreements than straight couples are.

I find this detail somewhat disturbing - but so is the 50% divorce rate among straight marriages.

Not so surprising details:

Nearly two-thirds of the weddings have been lesbian marriages.

Let me reword this: women are more interested in marriage then men.

And men, gay or straight, are still men. According to one married homosexual, “most married gay couples he knows are ‘for the most part monogamous, but for maybe a casual three-way.’”

Not surprisingly, the US military stands behind their 15 year old “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, and will dismiss any soldier who enters a same sex marriage in California. While officials argue that they won’t be trolling marriage lists to compare to their rolls, a spokesman for the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network disagrees:

“They’re available for anyone to pick up, and that means anyone with an ax to grind or anyone who wants to see someone discharged can get a copy and go to a commander and say, ‘Here, I have evidence of a violation of the policy,’ ” he said.

The Pentagon policy, he said, continues to single out gay service members for no good reason.

“We believe it is fundamentally unequal,” he said. “Gay service members are singled out and face the extra burden of having to hide their relationships in order to remain in the service.”

Over 12,000 service members have been discharged since the policy went into effect. [from The North County Times]

California voters going to the polls in November will have another major decision to make besides who to choose for President - now they’ll also be voting on whether to amend the state constitition to effectively ban gay marriage

If passed this new measure “would insert the sentence, ‘Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,’ into the state constitution,” thus nullifying the recent California Supreme Court decision that overturned a gay marriage ban on the ground that it was unconstitutional.

In 2000, 61% of Californiams voted for the original gay marriage ban during an election when 53% also voted for Al Gore, the Democratic Presidential nominee [stats: Infoplease]. Which indicates that popular support for a Democratic, ergo “liberal” nominee, does not guarantee support for gay rights. Could the measure’s appearance on the ballot tip the scales against Obama?

Larry Gross at USC’s Annenberg School doesn’t think it will make much of a difference in the Presidential race:

I doubt if the decision will have a large effect on the California race, as those most invested in denying gays the right to marry are not natural supporters of John McCain. If McCain tries to use this issue to garner support among the religious right — not inconceivable given his recent behavior — he risks alienating the independent voters he’ll want to take away from Obama. [USC Election 2008]

Now the question is if the anticipated record high numbers going the polls will be as eager to ban gay marriage in November as they were 8 years ago. Any theories?

Good As You, a gay activism blog, discovered that a California “pro-family” organization is comparing court clerks who issue marriage licenses for gays to the Nazi gassing the Jews

Good as You posts a screen grab from the Campaign for Children and Families showing highly volatile text before it was “scrubbed” from the site (and Google’s cache), which read the following:

Remember, even if county clerks tell you they MUST follow the Supreme Court decision that’s not true and you should tell them so… Ask you county clerk if they were a Nazi officer during WWII and had been ordered to gas they Jews. Would they?

Still remaining:

History is replete with examples of doing what was right despite unjust laws and tyrannical orders… The post-WWII Nuremberg trials punishing military officers who followed orders and committed crimes against humanity.

Yes, a group that claims to be promoting values is comparing a legal union between consenting adults to the genocide of millions.

The Campaign for Children and Families is a 501(c)(3) non-profit… which is unusual, because according to the IRS, groups with this status, “may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities.” One look at the group’s homepage indicates that their main intent is to influence legislation.

—

On the not so controversial side Cal Law’s Legal Pad blog suggests that if the “California Marriage Protection Act” passes in November, the result could be the elimination of state recognition of “marriages.” In summary, they believe the legal interpretation could come down to this:

“We could hypothetically resolve this whole mess by requiring the state to call all formal unions ‘domestic partnerships’ and leave it to the churches to decide who’s ‘married.’”

That sounds rational. But would the gay Nazis approve?

Image snagged from World of Wonder, but clearly the copyright of Fox TV…

“Three of the four Supreme Court judges who voted to overturn the ban were appointed by Republican governors.”-KTLA’s Eric Spillman

“We don’t leave whether blacks and whites can marry up to the voters. This shouldn’t be left up to the voters either.” -Amy Alkon

“The majority decision goes well beyond the narrow question of gay marriage. It also holds for the first time that sexual orientation is a ’suspect classification’ under the California’s Equal Protection Clause. Therefore, any law in the state that discriminates against homosexuals will be subject to ’strict scrutiny’ by the court - essentially treating it the same way as laws that discriminate against racial minorities.” -Justin Levine at Patterico

“I see a summer filled with rice-tossing and bouquet-throwing in my future as friends pair up - just for the sake of getting married. Talk about your shotgun weddings!” -Scott Schmidt

“Bill Rosendahl…will you marry me?” -Zuma Dogg

“Think how simple life can be – man and man. No more fighting over doing the dishes. We just won’t do the dishes! We’ll eat at Taco Bell every night. All this eating out will also have a positive influence on the economy!” -Citizen of the Month

Shortly after the California Supreme Court overruled a ban on gay marriages, City Council President Eric Garcetti posted the following on his blog:

The California Supreme Court came down on the side of equality and justice today. I’m proud that this opinion puts our state at the forefront of protecting and advancing human rights for all people.

I urge the Los Angeles County Clerk to immediately make marriage licenses available to same-sex couples.

Unless the court reconsiders their decision, as opponents will press them to do, “same-sex couples could start getting married in 30 days, the time it typically takes for the justices’ opinions to become final.”

After that, expect a lot of out of state visitors to show up at clerks offices statewide:

Unlike Massachusetts, California has no residency requirement for obtaining a marriage license, meaning gays from around the country are likely to flock to the state to be wed, said Jennifer Pizer, a gay-rights attorney who worked on the case. [Associated Press]

Opponents are also pushing for an amendment for a gay marriage ban in the state constitution to be put up for vote in November. I don’t want to give them any hints or anything, but they’d probably be better served to wait for an election that is less likely to be attended by liberals in such high numbers. That said, I look forward to the ballot initiative being squashed once and for all.

Of possible interest: How to get a marriage license in California.