March 4, 2008
In His Own Words: Gavin Newsom On Same-Sex Marriage
Ha ha. Our mayor is better than yours. Why? Because Gavin Newsom wrote a thoughtful post for the Daily Kos regarding today's state Supreme Court gay marriage percolation. Cool, right? Sure, we're confused, jealous, and sad that he didn't turn to SFist first. But while we go hit the bottle to squelch this ego blow, we urge you to read his words of inspiration and shocking clarity:
Separate Is Not Equalby Gavin Newsom
Four years ago, when Del Martin, Phyllis Lyon and more than 4,000 other couples said "I Do" this country took an irrevocable step toward securing equality for every American.
While many feel what we did was too much, too fast, too soon – we stand firm in the belief that our actions were not only just, but legal and constitutional. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the pursuit of happiness.
Today, the California Supreme Court is hearing arguments on whether excluding gay couples from marriage violates the state constitution. Today, these Justices have a unique chance to follow in the proud tradition of California's high court, which took a courageous stand on marriage equality in 1948 when it ruled that the state's ban on inter-racial marriage was unconstitutional.
Four years ago, when we started this process we knew this day would come – that we would have the opportunity to argue for justice and equality before the state Supreme Court. Whatever the Justices decide, the struggle will go on, both in the courts and at the ballot box.Right now, the same groups that sponsored the 2000 California ballot measure reinforcing the prohibition on same-sex marriages are circulating petitions that would write discrimination into the state Constitution and overturn laws granting benefits to same-sex couples.
Right now, as the Justices are hearing arguments on what I believe is the civil rights issue of our time, we have a chance to take a stand against hate, against injustice, and stand up for equality.
Please – take a moment right now and go to equalityforall.com and join the "Decline to Sign" campaign to discourage people from signing these dangerous and hateful petitions. The very best way we can show the Court, not to mention the governor, the state legislature and the country that equality should not be whim to popular opinion or the political winds, is to stop the newest effort to legalize discrimination.
No matter the outcome of today's arguments, it is clear that this battle will continue. I, for one, believe that it is a fight worth fighting and never giving up on, until we have won.
If you have a chance today, check out Judge Richard Kramer's opinion from 2004 in support of marriage equality. He offers a well reasoned, dispassionate analysis of the fundamental right to marry. His decision was overturned – but I believe that his reasoning will prevail, if not today then someday.
Photo: MeshSF
|
i'm not always the biggest fan of newsom, but what he has accomplished for lgbt rights can not be overestimated. granted, one might argue that he hasn't done much since, it was a media ploy or whatever, but when the gay marriage section in history books is written, it will certainly include a piece about san francisco in 2004 and the courageous step that mayor newsom took.
i'm proud of my city and i hope, in three months, to be just as proud of my state.
The one good thing Plastic Man has done.
And yet he's behind the candidate (Clinton) who doesn't support a full repeal of DOMA. Way to stand up for principle, Gavin!
He said "more than 4,000" rather than "over 4,000."
This instantly elevates him in my eyes.
Oh yeah, and I agree with what he wrote as well.
I agree Pancake, but to be fair, at least he's not endorsing someone who brought "pray the gay away" ministers with them on the campaign trail.
which candidate supported gay marriage?
i didn't think any of them
i was kinda disappointed that gav supported hillary as well but she'll be out of the race in the morning
so it won't matter
Fingers crossed that the Court rules the right way.
Why do you like "more than" so much more than "over," Bluecanary?
Glad Gavin is resting on his laurels and using his stump speech from 2004 about gay rights. (BTW great timing to help GWB get re-elected - nicely done.)
It would be really nice to see him get on that second issue on his "to do" list.
Because over is a term indicating many things, including relative height, but not a numerical distinction.
I do agree that this is a civil rights issue.
Because "more than" is correct. "Over" is not. That's what they taught me in journalism school, anyway.
way to go, gavster. your shameless pandering has paid off in at least one respect. you hear that, theyre talking about putting you in the HISTORY BOOKS!!!1!!1!!1one
now how about fixing MUNI, or solving some homicides, or doing anything substantial.
it is my opinion that supporting gay marriage in this way had absolutely zero political risk to a mayor of this city. ergo, he gets no credit for it. it is a civil rights issue, but your "support" doesnt count if you're not putting your neck on the line for it.
bluecanary, I take back all of the terrible things I've been saying about you. And March 4 was National Grammar Day!
Bluecanary, you don't actually think Newsom wrote that himself, do you?
Bluecanary, you don't actually think Newsom wrote that himself, do you?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there already several cases re gay marriage already wending their way through the court system when Gavin pulled this stunt?
Seems to me the non-showboating thing to do would have been to let the already existing cases be decided, rather than make a grandstanding move that ultimately benefited no one, and in fact hampered the movement (see all the states that immediately passed laws banning gay marriage in response to Gavin's publicity stunt, and yes, brought out the anti-gay bigots in droves to vote for Bush).
If I'm wrong and it was Gavin that started it all, then feel free to correct me.
Interracial marriage was still illegal in 13 states until 1967. Luckily, the old people eventually die and take their outdated idea(l)s with them to their graves. Unfortunately, some of them have children.
speaking of old people, it was their racist ways that won hillary texas last night. so sad. i fear this is the end of the democratic party. the superdelagates will now have to decide which nominee will take the ticket, infuriating the regular voters. i bet a lot of the independents that went for obama will go for mccain as a result if hillary gets the nod after arguing in court that florida and michigan should count now. net it all out, the rebublicans will get the white house again thanks to a bunch of red neck racists that do not want a black man in the whitehouse and thanks to hillary' negative campaign attacks.
way to go womyn!
Unfortunately, RobinSF, the type of people who are against gay marriage (and probably interracial marriage), have a LOT of children. Be fruitful and multiply and all that malarkey.
Looks like ol Gav does not take marriage seriously, so why listen to him. Took a vow til death do us part, for better or worse... and then walked away and now he is about to do it again so soon?
Marriage IS until death do us part and it is a bond between a man and a woman. Don't mess kids up anymore than they are with two mothers or two fathers. Partnerships for Gay couples, don't CALL it marriage.
Looks like ol Gav does not take marriage seriously, so why listen to him. Took a vow til death do us part, for better or worse... and then walked away and now he is about to do it again so soon?
Marriage IS until death do us part and it is a bond between a man and a woman. Don't mess kids up anymore than they are with two mothers or two fathers. Partnerships for Gay couples, don't CALL it marriage.
Oh please.
To be fair, I would venture a guess that Kimberly did a little "walking away" herself. You can't keep a wife if the wife doesn't want you anymore.