San Francisco weds first gay couple

[Pookie]

San Francisco weds first gay couple

Thursday, February 12, 2004 Posted: 4:05 PM EST (2105 GMT)


SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- In a bold political and legal challenge to California law, city authorities officiated at the marriage of a lesbian couple Thursday and said they will issue more gay marriage licenses.

The act of civil disobedience was coordinated by Mayor Gavin Newsom and top city officials and was intended to beat a conservative group to the punch.

The group, Campaign for California Families, had planned to go to court on Friday to get an injunction preventing the city from issuing marriage licenses to gay couples.

Longtime lesbian activists Phyllis Lyon, 79, and Del Martin, 83, were hurriedly issued a license and were married just before noon by City Assessor Mabel Teng in a closed-door civil ceremony at City Hall, mayor's spokesman Peter Ragone said. The two have been a couple for 51 years.

Ragone said that beginning at noon, officials would begin issuing marriage licenses to any gay couples applying for one. One lesbian couple had already lined up outside City Hall, one of the women wearing a white wedding dress.

Lyon and Martin said after the brief ceremony that they were going home to rest and did not plan anything to celebrate. The couple seemed proud of what they had done.

"Why shouldn't we" be able to marry? Lyon asked.

Thursday's marriage runs counter to a ballot measure California voters approved in 2000 that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

No state legally sanctions gay marriage, though Massachusetts could become the first this spring. The Massachusetts high court has ruled that gays are entitled under the state constitution to marry.

State lawmakers later passed a domestic partner law that, when it goes into effect in 2005, will offer the most generous protections to gays outside Vermont.

Mayor Newsom was not present for the wedding Thursday. The two official witnesses were Kate Kendell, director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights and former city official Roberta Achtenberg.

The Campaign for California Families did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/12/gay.marriage.california.ap/index.html

 

[Etoile]

I heard about this on the radio (NPR) coming home tonight.

They mentioned that Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin are very well known in the SF Bay Area gay and lesbian community. To which my response (out loud) was "pfft, they're well-known everywhere!" Come on, these are the original Daughters of Bilitis! I think it is totally fitting that they were the first to marry in San Francisco.

 

[fille]

It's nice to see at least a few public officials having, and exercising, the courage of their convictions. SF is not the riskiest place in the world to do what they did, I suppose, but it still took courage to do it. Nice, too, that these ladies who have been together for so very long, and who might not have that many more years together, were able to be married as any loving committed couple should be able to do. The folks who consider gay marriage as an attack on the institution will have a hard time turning these two into examples of the supposedly shameless and amoral lifestyle they claim to be afraid of.

 

[Bitchslapper]

What is it with Califorinia defying Federal law? First marijuana, and now gay marriage. The ironic thing is that I'm for fully legalizing both, but constitutionally speaking, anything that is not expressly forbidden by the federal government is up to the states. Now, last time I checked, marijuana was listed as a controlled substance. I'm not so sure about the gay marriage thing, if it's explicitly forbidden or if there's just no provision for it.

 

[Pookie]

I heard about this on the radio (NPR) coming home tonight.

They mentioned that Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin are very well known in the SF Bay Area gay and lesbian community. To which my response (out loud) was "pfft, they're well-known everywhere!" Come on, these are the original Daughters of Bilitis! I think it is totally fitting that they were the first to marry in San Francisco.

I agree that it's totally fitting. They've been a couple for over 50 years!

I applaud the Mayor and city officials for standing up against discrimination. It was a very bold move.

 

[Pookie]

What is it with Califorinia defying Federal law? First marijuana, and now gay marriage. The ironic thing is that I'm for fully legalizing both, but constitutionally speaking, anything that is not expressly forbidden by the federal government is up to the states. Now, last time I checked, marijuana was listed as a controlled substance. I'm not so sure about the gay marriage thing, if it's explicitly forbidden or if there's just no provision for it.

The City of San Francisco isn't defying a Federal law. They're defying State of California law enacted in 1974 limiting marriage to a man and a woman.

"... but constitutionally speaking, anything that is not expressly forbidden by the federal government is up to the states."

That's not what the US Constitution says. The Tenth Amendment states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The Federal government can't make a power "forbidden" to the States. The Federal Government can't forbid States from allowing same-sex marriages. That is why each State has its own specific marriage laws. It's also why it would take an amendment to the US Constitution to ban same-sex marriage in all fifty States.

 

[Pookie]

Lesbian and Gay Couples in San Francisco Are Granted Marriage Licenses

February 12, 2004

Historic, first-in-the-nation move is heralded as major breakthrough for fairness and equality

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SAN FRANCISCO--The City and County of San Francisco today became the first government in the United States to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples. City officials followed a directive set in motion by Mayor Gavin Newsom. Advocates heralded the move as the most significant moment in the fight for equal marriage rights for same-sex couples.

“For many Americans, their wedding day is one of the happiest days of their life,” said Geoffrey Kors, executive director for Equality California, the state’s leading gay rights advocacy group. “For these San Francisco couples, it is no different with one exception. Yesterday, they couldn’t get married. Today, they can. To suggest that these couples are experiencing a profound sense of happiness is an understatement.”

Dorothy Ehrlich, executive director of the ACLU of Northern California, added: "Just as we told the state in 1974 when they passed a statute limiting marriage to a man and a woman, that kind of discrimination against same-sex couples violates the California constitution's promise of equality. Discrimination in marriage was wrong then and it's wrong now."

Lesbian and gay couples began gathering late this morning at the County Clerk’s office following an announcement by the mayor’s office indicating that they would begin issuing licenses. In total, four couples were granted marriage licenses.

Among the first to be married were Del Martin, 83, and Phyllis Lyon, 80, who have been together for more than 50 years. Martin and Lyon met in Seattle in 1950 and began dating in 1952. They moved to San Francisco in 1953. The two women founded the Daughters of Bilitis, the first national lesbian rights organization.

“Phyllis and I demonstrated our commitment to one another more than half a century ago,” said Martin. “Today, San Francisco has demonstrated its commitment to us through equality and fairness.”

Also receiving marriage licenses were Sarah Conner, 35, and Gillian Smith, 34, of the Bay Area. Conner, born in Minneapolis, moved to California in 1992 to pursue graduate studies at the Graduate Theological Union and is now the Manager of Stewardship and Information at California Pacific Medical Center Foundation. Smith, born in Brooklyn, NY, moved to the Bay Area in 1991 and is currently the Finance and Administration Associate at the Women’s Funding Network, a San Francisco non-profit.

“Before we met, neither of us believed in love at first sight,” Sarah Conner. “However, when we locked eyes for the first time, we were proven wrong. Our first four years together have flown by, and have been filled with what already seems like a lifetime of challenges, personal achievements, romance, fun, laughter, joy, and love. In each other we have found the perfect spouse.”

"This is an unforgettable day," said National Center for Lesbian Rights Executive Director Kate Kendell. "For the first time in this country, lesbian and gay couples in loving, committed relationships were able to exercise the same right to protect their families that others take for granted."

On the same day, State Assembly member Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) introduced the Marriage License Non-Discrimination Act (MLNDA), sponsored by Equality California. The bill would end discrimination in the issuance of marriage licenses statewide, allowing same-sex couples to obtain marriage licenses anywhere in California.

There are 8,902 same-sex couples living in the same household in San Francisco according to the 2000 U.S. Census.

Newsom told the San Francisco Chronicle on Tuesday, “A little more than a month ago, I took the oath of office here at City Hall and swore to uphold California’s Constitution, which clearly outlaws all forms of discrimination. Denying basic rights to members of our community will not be tolerated.”

Source: http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=14949&c=101

 

[lipo]

Well done California

With so many western nations now having revolutionary right wing governments, led by Bush and his acolytes it’s refreshing to see that there are still individuals willing to stand against parochial bigotry. Well done California

 

[deezire1900]

THANK YOU CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS!

Speaking of state laws...

Did you know that in NC it is illegal to plow your crop fields with an Elephant.

Some states are CRAZY!

Deezire

 

[Etoile]

Here's a great page with information about the federal DOMA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act

There are also links to information about individual state DOMAs.

 

[Pookie]

I noticed this morning that the "institution of marriage" had failed to disintegrate after the first gay marriage in the US yesterday. Maybe it'll happen later today.

 

[Cigan]

What is it with Califorinia defying Federal law? First marijuana, and now gay marriage. The ironic thing is that I'm for fully legalizing both, but constitutionally speaking, anything that is not expressly forbidden by the federal government is up to the states. Now, last time I checked, marijuana was listed as a controlled substance. I'm not so sure about the gay marriage thing, if it's explicitly forbidden or if there's just no provision for it.

The Federal DOMA only states that marriage is between a man and a woman for consideration of federal programs. If it was as sweeping as you imply here then there wouldn't be any state DOMAs and the Massachusets court wouldn't have been able to rule the way they did because their ruling was based on their state constitution not the national constitution, and federal law takes precsidence over state constitution.

 

[Cigan]

THANK YOU CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS!

Speaking of state laws...

Did you know that in NC it is illegal to plow your crop fields with an Elephant.

Some states are CRAZY!

Deezire

I wish your praise was called for. Unfortunately what the Mayor of SF did isn't entirely legal under their state law. The Law makers of California have stated through a ratified proposition that same sex marriage is indeed illegal in California. It's going to be interesting to see where this one ends up when the dust has settled.

 

[Pookie]

I wish your praise was called for. Unfortunately what the Mayor of SF did isn't entirely legal under their state law. The Law makers of California have stated through a ratified proposition that same sex marriage is indeed illegal in California. It's going to be interesting to see where this one ends up when the dust has settled.

You can count on a legal challenge to what San Fran did yesterday. I expect there will be a Court injunction to prevent any more marriage licenses being issued to same-sex couples. But it also puts the whole issue up for the Courts to decide now. And the Courts have been our best friends so far in fighting discrimination. The Cali Constitution should work to our advantage as well, when it begins going through the Courts. It was clearly an act of civil disobedience, but nothing ventured ... nothing gained.

 

[Pookie]

San Francisco Mayor Letter re: Marriage Licenses

SF Mayor Gavin Newsom's
Letter to County Clerk
Re: Issuing Marriage Licenses
(Feb. 10, 2004)


Letter to County Clerk


February 10, 2004

Nancy Alfaro
San Francisco County Clerk
City Hall, Room 168
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102

Dear Ms. Alfaro,

Upon taking the Oath of Office, becoming the Mayor of the City and County of San Francisco, I swore to uphold the Constitution of the State of California. Article I, Section 7, subdivision (a) of the California Constitution provides that "[a] person may not be . . . denied equal protection of the laws." The California courts have interpreted the equal protection clause of the California Constitution to apply to lesbians and gay men and have suggested that laws that treat homosexuals differently from heterosexuals are suspect. The California courts have also stated that discrimination against gay men and lesbians is invidious. The California courts have held that gender discrimination is suspect and invidious as well. The Supreme Courts in other states have held that equal protection provisions in their state constitutions prohibit discrimination against gay men and lesbians with respect to the rights and obligations flowing from marriage. It is my belief that these decisions are persuasive and that the California Constitution similarly prohibits such discrimination.

Pursuant to my sworn duty to uphold the California Constitution, including specifically its equal protection clause, I request that you determine what changes should be made to the forms and documents used to apply for and issue marriage licenses in order to provide marriage licenses on a non-discriminatory basis, without regard to gender or sexual orientation.

Respectfully,

Mayor Gavin Newsom


cc: Dennis Herrera, City Attorney, City and County of San Francisco
Matt Gonzalez, President of the Board of Supervisors, City and County of San
Francisco
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, State of California
Kevin Shelley, Secretary of State, State of California
Mabel Teng, Assessor, City and County of San Francisco

Source: http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/glrts/sfmayor21004ltr.html

 

[Pookie]

Court challenge planned to San Francisco same-sex marriages

Friday, February 13, 2004 Posted: 1:20 PM EST (1820 GMT)

Gay couples flocked to San Francisco city hall for marriage licenses; some married on the spot.


SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) -- A conservative family values group says it will file a lawsuit Friday morning against San Francisco's newly elected mayor in an effort to block same-sex marriage licenses.

Acting on Mayor Gavin Newsom's orders, County Clerk Nancy Alfaro on Thursday began issuing same-sex marriage licenses, prompting dozens of weddings at City Hall.

The Campaign for California Families announced it will file a lawsuit against Newsom and Alfaro "for violating California state law on marriage and the issuing of marriage licenses."

"California state law says marriage is only for a man and a woman," said CCF Executive Director Randy Thomasson in a statement on the group's Web site.

As word spread about the same-sex marriage licenses, couples flocked to city hall. City officials issued 95 marriage licenses to same-sex couples, before closing for the day. The Associated Press reported that 87 couples were married on the spot. Officials told the remaining couples to come back on Friday, according to the AP.

The first to be married Thursday were Phyllis Lyon, 80, and Dorothy Martin, 83, who have been together for 51 years.

"We have a right just like anyone else to get married to the person we want to get married to," Lyon said.

Newsom said not granting same-sex couples marriage licenses is discriminatory.

"We are reading the direct language within the state constitution, and we directed our county clerk to do the right thing and extend the privilege that's extended to my wife and myself and millions of us across the country to same-sex couples," the mayor told CNN's Bill Hemmer.

Newsom said he did not accept that gay marriages were against state law, again citing the California Constitution.

"Where is the fundamental decency to extend the same privileges and rights the rest of us are afforded?" the mayor asked. "What is the fundamental right to perpetuate a policy of separate but unequal that people seem to suggest is a compromise?"

The issuing of the licenses came as lawmakers in Massachusetts attempted to produce a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

Late Thursday, the legislature voted down a third attempt in two days to come up with the legislation.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled last November that gay men and lesbians cannot be forbidden from joining in civil marriages under the Massachusetts Constitution. Last week, in response to a question from the state Senate, the court said that civil unions would not be an acceptable substitute.

The court has ordered the Legislature to allow gay men and lesbians to marry by this May.

In San Francisco, Newsom said he had not yet discussed his action with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. The governor said before he was elected in October's recall election that he believed marriage was between a man and a woman, but he said he does approve of some kind of domestic partnership.

"I feel strongly and passionately about this. I don't know where the governor stands," Newsom said.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/02/13/samesex.marriage/index.html

 

[Vulnavia]

I noticed this morning that the "institution of marriage" had failed to disintegrate after the first gay marriage in the US yesterday. Maybe it'll happen later today.

Brittany Spears could get married again too! I suspect that is far more damaging to the Institution of Marriage than anything. Congratulations to Phyllis and Dorothy! What a wonderful way to celebrate a long life together!

 

[Bitchslapper]

I noticed this morning that the "institution of marriage" had failed to disintegrate after the first gay marriage in the US yesterday. Maybe it'll happen later today.

Nah, give it a couple weeks. That old lesbian couple is bound to break up soon after, what, 50 years? That will start a chain reaction, resulting in the complete annihilation of all marriages and a total nationwide collapse of the institution itself. It might even spread all over the globe. It's anarchy I tell ya.

 

[oh21]

Brittany Spears could get married again too! I suspect that is far more damaging to the Institution of Marriage than anything. Congratulations to Phyllis and Dorothy! What a wonderful way to celebrate a long life together!

HA! *snort* this made me laugh, excellent point.

 

[lovelylisa]

I think that is the most beautiful wedding I've heard.

 

[Bitchslapper]

Yeah, that'd be some wedding night, huh? On the one hand I'm intrigued, because they're lesbians and I (as most men who are attracted to women) am interested in the concept of women having sex with each other. But on the other hand, they're 80 years old or so, and I'm not as much interested in the granny sex. So now I'm conflicted...it's times like these I wish I had a Magic 8 Ball, ya know?

 

[Pookie]

More gays, lesbians marry on eve of court hearing
Injunction request Tuesday could halt stream of newlyweds

Tuesday, February 17, 2004 Posted: 12:52 AM EST (0552 GMT)


SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) -- By noon Monday, 140 couples -- nearly all of them gays or lesbians -- had married at City Hall, and a city worker vowed that the day's total would rise to 650 before the weddings stop at 8 p.m.

As couples emerged from the rotunda into a chilly drizzle at a rate of more than one per minute, they were greeted with showers of rice, flower petals and applause from hundreds of well-wishers.

Inside, County Assessor and Recorder Mabel Teng -- whose signature makes the marriage certificates legal -- thanked those waiting for their patience.

"I want to thank you for bringing so much joy and love to City Hall," she said. "For those of you who tied a knot, congratulations. May you have a lifetime of happiness together."

It was the fifth consecutive day that gays and lesbians have lined up to get marriage licenses before a court challenge to try to stop the same-sex marriages is heard Tuesday.

Each couple paid $82 for a marriage application and a $13 license fee in exchange for the certificate.

On a typical day, only about 30 couples marry in City Hall, Teng said. That changed last week, when Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered that licenses be granted to same-sex couples.

The mayor cited the state constitution that bars discrimination against people based on their sexual orientation. But a court challenge has been mounted based on a 2000 ballot initiative approved by voters that declares California recognizes only marriages between a man and woman.

Newsom also ordered City Hall to stay open through the weekend and Monday -- which is Presidents Day, a federal holiday -- to accommodate as many couples as possible.

On Sunday, 487 couples were married, bringing the total since Thursday to more than 1,600. If Monday's goal is met, the total will exceed 2,250 -- all of them married by city officials who volunteered their time over the holiday weekend.

"It's purely out of love and commitment to equal rights," Teng said.

The rained-on parade may screech to a halt Tuesday. At 11 a.m. (2 p.m. ET), San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Kevin McCarthy is slated to hear an injunction request from a group opposed to same-sex marriage.

A second request is to be heard at 2 p.m. (5 p.m. ET) by Judge James Warren, who asked that briefs be filed Monday in the case.

It was not clear whether either judge would void the licenses that have been issued, simply stop granting more of them or allow them to continue. One legal expert said that, because so many of those tying the knot are from outside California, the case could wind up in federal court.

Because San Francisco does not require proof of residency, couples have come from across the country. Thirty-six states prohibit same-sex marriage. Teng said 85 percent of the couples were from the Bay Area.

James Parker of Mobile, Alabama, who had just married Eric Oliver, his companion of five years, said he was not worried that their certificate would be voided.

"If it doesn't stick this time, it will -- eventually," he said. Either way, he added, "It was the best feeling you could ever have."

Warren rejected a motion Friday to issue a temporary restraining order against the city, saying the group requesting it -- the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund -- had given insufficient notice of the request.

The Alliance Defense Fund and the Campaign for California Families argue Newsom's action violates California law.

"Our case is going full-steam ahead to rescue the vote of 4.6 million Californians from Mayor Gavin Newsom's abusive power," said Richard Ackerman, co-counsel for CCF, in a written statement posted on the group's Web site. "The renegade mayor of San Francisco is openly violating California law that holds marriage is only for a man and a woman."

The issuing of the licenses in San Francisco began as lawmakers in Massachusetts debated a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. After a third attempt to pass the measure failed Thursday, the Legislature recessed its constitutional convention until March 11, when it is expected to take up the issue again. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ordered the Legislature to allow gays to marry by May.

The issue also spilled into the political arena during Monday night's debate among the five Democratic presidential candidates.

Asked if he would vote for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts said it would depend on the terminology, and said the decision should be up to individual states.

"I, personally, believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also believe that we ought to be able to not let marriage and the concept get in the way of respecting the rights of people to be able to visit a partner in a hospital, to be able to pass on property, to be able to live under the equal protection clause of the United States."

Peter Ragone, spokesman for the mayor's office, said Newsom contacted some state and federal officials to inform them of his decision.

Their reaction?

"There have been some sighs on the phone, but they realize that we're doing this for equality of everyone," Ragone said.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/02/16/samesex.marriage/index.html

 

[Pookie]

Same-sex marriage decisions delayed

Mayor: 'Eventually we are going to succeed'

Tuesday, February 17, 2004 Posted: 9:07 PM EST (0207 GMT)


SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) -- Two judges have delayed decisions that could have stopped San Francisco's issuance of marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples, allowing the city to issue the licenses until at least Friday when the next hearing is scheduled.

Nearly 2,500 gay couples have been married in San Francisco since Thursday, including 825 in a chilling rain on Monday.

In two separate cases, judges postponed making decisions which could have voided the licenses, ordered the city to stop granting them or declared the practice legal.

Mayor Gavin Newsom told CNN the delays should be considered victories. He said the city will continue to avoid discrimination by offering marriage licenses to same sex couples.

San Francisco Superior Court Judge James Warren heard the case filed by the Proposition 22 Legal Defense and Education Fund. The group is seeking an injunction to bar the issuance of licenses.

Early in the hearing, Warren said he was leaning toward letting the marriages continue until constitutional issues in the matter are resolved.

The plaintiffs argued that Newsom has no constitutional authority to grant city employees the right to issue gay and lesbian marriage licenses, and to use city resources to do so.

Warren acknowledged the plaintiffs' argument that the city is breaking state law by issuing the same-sex marriage licenses but gave the city the choice of either immediately ceasing to issue the licenses or continuing to grant them until city attorneys return to court March 29 to show cause as to why the mayor's action is allowable.

Earlier Tuesday in a similar hearing, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Ronald Quidachay heard arguments in a case filed by Campaign for California Families and the Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona-based group.

Quidachay delayed his decision because he received two different versions of the complaint

Quidachay asked attorneys for the city and the two conservative groups to work together to present the correct documents to the court Friday.

One legal expert said that because so many of those tying the knot are from outside California, the case could wind up in federal court. Couples have been traveling to the city to marry because San Francisco does not require proof of residency to wed.

"State law of California says that marriage is only for a man and a woman," Randy Thomasson, executive director for the Campaign for California Families, said. "The renegade mayor of San Francisco is violating the state law. He's pretending to be a dictator. He's imposing his own values upon the citizenry, and he is really out of order."

Mayor Newsom said Tuesday that marriage between same-sex couples is "inevitable" and that anything less is "fundamentally wrong." Newsom has promised to "fight hard" for his position.

"There's also a constitution in the state of California that I swore to uphold just 39 days ago," he said on CNN's "American Morning."

"The bottom line is I took an oath of office and read that constitution, and nowhere in there did it say that I should discriminate."

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/17/samesex.marriage/index.html

 

[Mary Hall]

Why is it such a big deal that gays got married? Has the world ended? It hasn`t? Then why the fuss?

Let gays get married, give them the same rights we have, they are human beings too

 

[College_geek]

Why is it such a big deal that gays got married? Has the world ended? It hasn`t? Then why the fuss?

Let gays get married, give them the same rights we have, they are human beings too

No kidding! I was just reading on MSN that "Bush is troubled" by the fact that San Francisco is making a bunch of people happy. Of course that's not exactly what it said, but if you think about it, that's kind of what it's saying. Instead of worrying about old traditions, I think that the nation should look at the present and the future. Times have changed and people feel that it is safe for them to come out and express their love for another person of the same sex. Screw the "ancient sacredness" of marriage being between a man and a woman. Love is love.