Today’s letter - struggling with patriotism

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I have been struggling to find the right words to express what I was feeling yesterday after the Supreme Court ended California’s ban on marriage.

It was an emotion I hadn’t felt in a long time, and it took me a while to recognize it. A reporter was leaving the house and he asked me if I had specially put up the American Flag that was out in front that day. I explained that we commonly and proudly fly it. Then it struck me. The decision that said “liberty and justice for all” inspired simple, visceral “Patriotism.”

If we can accept lesbian and gay people as part of America, then we can accept anybody. But if we can block these people simply because of what they think or what they believe, then we can block anybody. And that is a sad prospect for us all.

The Opponents of Equality talk about the Tradition of Marriage. We have a 232-year-old Tradition of Liberty. Neither tradition is static, but each grows along with our collective wisdom.

I was proud of my country yesterday and the liberties she indulged in. I was proud of the couples who used their liberty to ask for more. I was proud to stand behind my elected officials as they stood up for me. I was proud to be an American.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - Chancellor Schwarzenegger

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Today was the 75th anniversary of the date Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany. Before his reign was over, more than 65,000 homosexuals were interred or murdered.

When you vetoed AB 43, the bill that would have stopped my family from being singled out for special exclusion from marriage, you claimed that California law left you no choice.

Martin Luther King said “Don’t ever forget that what Hitler did was legal.” I don’t want you to forget that what you did to me and my family by denying me the individual choice of marriage might have been legal, but it was not right.

Strong families and individual choice are the cornerstone of California’s economy and your political party. I just wish you would support my choice to form and keep a family through marriage.

Yours,

Today’s letter - an open letter asking for your help

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Equality California and the Let California Ring campaign are collecting signatures on an open letter asking you to address the California Supreme Court during oral arguments on the constitutionality of gay marriage this Spring.

As a defendant in the matter, and a proponent of “the dignity of every Californian,” you have an opportunity to speak directly to the judges about the expensive folly of excluding same-sex couples from participation in the economy and society.

If you were truly handcuffed into vetoing AB 43, a bill brought to you by the people through their elected representatives, now is your chance to make things right.

Strong families and individual choice are the cornerstone of California’s economy and your political party. I just want the government to support my choice to form and keep strong families through marriage.

Yours,

Today’s letter - Upholding the Constitution is not optional

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

When you vetoed AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, you said that you couldn’t sign it because it would have been illegal and you would have gone to jail.

I believe you committed a more criminal act by failing to uphold the Constitution to which you swore allegiance. The Constitution, as you know, says that you are not supposed to pick out a whole group of people because of what they believe or how they were born, and force them to follow a different set of laws than everybody else.

You should have signed AB 43 because it was the right thing to do, and if you went to prison for following your Constitution obligation to protect Californians from discrimination for their religion, gender or sexual orientation, that too would be the right thing to do.

Martin Luther King Jr. explains:

“I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.”

“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.”

“Now, I say to you today my friends, even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: - ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’”

“In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

It is too late for you to sign AB 43, but it is not too late for you to end your silence and protect the Constitution by saying everybody deserves the same freedom to marry.

Yours,

Today’s letter - who TO marry, not who CAN marry

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

When you vetoed AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, you said that the people should decide the future of gay marriage.

What you should have said is that the people should be able to decide who they want to marry for themselves.

You see, your version takes away the most intimate decision from people and puts it in the hands of the state, my version takes away that very personal decision from Sacramento and puts it in the hands of the people who would be actually getting married.

Please tell the people of California that you made a mistake – it is the power to decide who to marry, not the power to decide who can marry, that should be in the hands of the people.

Yours,

Today’s letter - Silently tolerating nonsense

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I like you because you’re a non-nonsense kind of guy. You drive a hummer and smoke cigars regardless of what people say. And just as effectively as you enjoy your own freedoms, you usually defend those of Californians. I would have even voted for you – except for one strange thing: you consistently and mysteriously block same-sex couples from having the freedom to marry.

There were many occasions when you could have stepped up and said something in support of this freedom. Way back when Proposition 22 was just a gleam in Pete Knight’s eye, you could have said “people should be able to do what they want” in the context of gay marriage instead of gay sex. When I was married in San Francisco in 2004 you could have said “we ought to change things so these people can get married legally” instead of just smacking down with the law. When the people and legislature asked you to sign AB 849 in 2005 and AB 43 in 2007, you could have said “I regret having to veto the bill.” Instead you gleefully sent it – and my freedom – back to ground zero.

Thousands of same-sex couples are just trying to make the same commitment of marriage you and Maria were free to make. Why do you tolerate the nonsense of domestic apartheid? Why do you stand silent while freedoms are being trampled?

I really expected more from you.

Yours,

Today’s letter - Hate costs Dough

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I wrote to you in July as an angry taxpayer about the cost of limiting marriage to heterosexual couples as revealed by The Williams Institute at UCLA.

Their recent analysis for Maryland revealed that their 8,000 same-sex couples, if married, would attract about $100 million of spending and $14 million in tax revenue EACH YEAR.

By comparison, their 2004 analysis of California showed that the 1977 ban on marriage costs us $16 Billion in spending and $25 million in tax revenue EACH YEAR.

As a taxpayer, I sure could use a slice of that dough, but as a gay man I would rather have the freedom to get married.

Whether it is fiscal responsibility, or just the right thing to do, I wish you would end your support of the costly ban on gay marriage and instead support the freedom to marry for all Californians.

Yours,

Today’s letter - This joy remains tinged with sadness

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Next week, three generations of our family will gather around the dinner table: us, our newborn twins, and all four of our parents. It is amazing to watch our parents glow in the pride of their grandchildren – the first on both sides of the family.

Yet, this joy remains tinged with sadness. Unlike our parents, my fiancée and I are blocked from marriage. I am upset at being excluded from the time-tested security the law provides married couples, but what really makes me sad is that it deprives our parents of the hope of seeing their children’s wedding. All of the gratitude, joy and unqualified support that will be in that room that day are not going to create a world where we are free to marry.

We will be the only unwed couple at the table - the ones who had our kids out of wedlock - and until we can wed, we will always be thinking there is a small sense of shame when we – despite all our hard work – are grouped with Anna Nicole and Larry Birkhead as our parents shake their heads and cluck their tongues about the fallout from their unwed escapades.

I have been finding ways to convert the shame into anger, and I was surprised at how easy it is: we simply blame the fact that we are treated as less than equal, less perfect and less human than other couples directly on you, Governor.

You could have signed AB 849 in 2005; you could have signed AB 43 this past October; you could have said that you think all Californians should have the same freedom to marry. But you did none of those things.

It will take a lot more than you to spoil our Thanksgiving, but I don’t think I’m being greedy to say that I wish your support could have been one more thing for which to be thankful, rather than one more thing over which to shake our heads and cluck our tongues.

Yours,

Today’s letter - "yours"

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

You might be wondering why I sign my letters “Yours.”

You asked the Attorney General to annul my marriage in 2004. You blocked my freedom to choose marriage when you vetoed AB 849 two years ago and AB 43 last month. You refuse to stand with me in support of freedom and equality, and you insist that I endure as a second-class citizen until a seven-year-old referendum winds its way through the courts.

You control my family’s ability to access the security and stability that marriage provides, and you keep meddling with my human rights by doing things to me that you wouldn’t do to Britney Spears. You treat me like I am, actually,

Yours,

Today’s letter - Orson Welles causes panic

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Today is the 69th Anniversary of Orson Welles’ radio broadcast of War of the Worlds. His convincing broadcast caused panic in the real world. I want to tell you how the seven pro-LGBT bills that you signed are bringing on the real end of our world, an apocalypse stalled only by your veto of AB 43.

Mona Passignano, a spokesperson for Focus on the Family Action, said that the seven bills will “have a devastating impact on churches and Christian families in the state for years to come.”

Unlocking the door to the Four Horsemen’s stable is SB 777 that calls for public school administrators and teachers to work towards protecting students from harassment and bullying.

The Catholic News Agency (CNA) reports that SB 777 will require “all California public schools to positively portray homosexuality to children as young as kindergarten.”

Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families (CCF), explains that “textbooks could be forbidden from portraying marriage as only between a man and a woman; textbooks could be required to present homosexual historical figures; and sex-specific Homecoming King and Queen contests could be forced to change. … This means children as young as five years old will be mentally molested in school classrooms.”

“The legislation might even mandate unisex restrooms.”

“Now that SB 777 is law,” says Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for Capitol Resource Institute, “schools will in fact become indoctrination centers for sexual experimentation.”

But SB 777 is not alone. LifeSiteNews.com explains that AB 14 “prohibits state funding for any program that does not support transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality. This means state-funded social services operated by churches and other houses of faith, which provide essential services to children and adults, could dry up.”

Thank God that you vetoed AB 43, the bill that would have brought us the freedom to marry, and did your part to preserve the hatred and intolerance that is apparently the only thing between us and the end of the world.

Yours,

Today’s letter - If it quacks like a duck, it’s a duck

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Like all people, I have guilty pleasures; mine is Desperate Housewives on ABC.

As you may know, last night a gay couple moved onto the street. They introduced themselves as “partners” and Susan got confused, thinking they were co-investors in some business. Silly Susan was embarrassed, but Bob and Lee were humiliated, because their “Green Acres”-inspired relationship was sterilized down to a business transaction because of a word and a cruel law.

Everybody knows what marriage is. Having two sets of laws - and two words - to describe such simple things is just plain wrong.

It is too late for you to sign AB 43, the bill that would have let families like Bob and Lee’s choose ‘marriage’ instead of ‘partnership.’ But it is not too late for you to support the freedom to marry.

Yours,

Today’s letter - an opportunity to unite, squandered

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Thank you for signing seven LGBT bills into law this session, but I wish you had also signed AB 43 to stop discrimination once and for all.

Signing AB 43 would have sent a clear message to the Opponents of Equality that no one group is more worthy of marriage than another, and all good citizens play by the same rules. A veto lets the Opponents of Equality continue to use access to marriage as a weapon to demoralize LGBT citizens.

Your choice to veto AB 43 simply divides us by our beliefs about discrimination, rather than uniting us with our beliefs about freedom.

Yours,

Today’s letter - Focus on the Family lies

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Focus on the Family lied, and you swallowed the Kool Aide. Citizenlink.com, the activation network of Focus on the Family, repeatedly refers to Proposition 22 as a “Constitutional Amendment,” such as in this article by their Associate Editor, Jennifer Mesko:

One of the bills, AB 43, is another attempt to force same-sex “marriage” onto the residents of California. In 2000, 62 percent of voters passed a constitutional amendment that states, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

That you signed seven LGBT-positive bills this session has poor Dr. Dobson in a thither, which is nice, but all those calls you got in support of your veto were based on misinformation - that Proposition 22 was a Constitutional Amendment.

What changes this from “shame on him” to “shame on you” is that your office did nothing to correct that misinformation, choosing to use it instead as a smoke-screen for vetoing AB 43 and my relationship.

Not everybody knows the gritty details of how Proposition 22 and AB 43 pass in the dark, but you do. You could have explained that Prop 22 covers 308.5 of the Family Code dealing with foreign marriages while AB 43 restores Sections 300 and 302 to their pre-1977 traditional language, “marriage is between two persons.” But you choose to ride the Focus on the Family Wrongmobile instead.

Depriving me and my family from making the commitment of marriage is wrong, but using convenient misinformation to deny basic freedom is perhaps worse.

Yours truly,

Today’s letter - here is what you could say

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

As you approach the deadline for acting on legislation from this fiscal year, I thought I might help out by writing a message for you to use in relation to AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act.

I was careful to address your objections in the past as well as the ultimate issue of using mere laws – even voter initiatives - to override the Constitution.

My fellow Californians.

I said that I would veto AB 43 because I believe the courts and the people should decide the fate of marriage in this state. I also said that lesbian and gay couples are entitled to full protection under the law and should not be discriminated against based upon their relationships. Up to now, I had seen these as being in contradiction to each other, but I have come to realize that it is not possible to treat these couples fairly while blocking them from marriage.

The people have made it clear through their elected representatives and the State Constitution that they do not tolerate discrimination in any form. Statutes passed by the legislature and even by voter initiatives are not able to create discrimination without changing the Constitution.

I also said that I would veto AB 43 because I lacked the authority to reverse an initiative approved by the people of California. I am not seeking that authority because I do not intend to reverse an initiative statute.

The initiative statute passed by the voters as Proposition 22 in 2000 enacted California Family Code Section 308.5 relating to marriages performed in other jurisdictions. It did not change the Constitution.

AB 43 changes Sections 300 and 302 of the California Family Code to say that a marriage is a contractual relationship between two persons. This is the original language of the Family Code prior to a legislative statute passed in 1977. It makes no changes to the implementation or enforcement of section 308.5.

AB 43 also provides for the free exercise of religion by institutions who believe in performing marriages of same-sex couples. Article I, section 4 of the California Constitution guarantees free exercise and enjoyment of religion without discrimination or preference, and as I explained earlier, Proposition 22 did not amend the Constitution.

Structures such as Domestic Partnerships and Civil Unions, which I have supported in the past, are undermining marriage by providing a way for couples to cohabitate without making the commitment of marriage. Proposition 22 was passed to defend marriage as an institution, not to defend it against some kind of invader. We can not protect marriage by excluding people who want to support it, or by creating imaginary enemies to keep out. These tactics divide us and weaken our ability to face the real problem. The best way to follow the intent of Proposition 22 is to provide one set of laws governing relationships in this state and providing universal access to them.

The courts and the people will have their say. The issue regarding the constitutionality of section 308.5 and its prohibition against recognizing same-sex marriages performed elsewhere is currently before the Court of Appeal in San Francisco and will likely be decided by the Supreme Court. Likewise, if the people want to exclude certain families from the security of marriage, they will need to pass a Constitutional amendment to do that. In the meantime, it is wrong to deny any citizen the freedom to marry, and just as wrong for me to block this bill.

I intend to uphold the Constitution of this state and the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives by signing this bill into law.

The tide is turning, Governor. Do you want to be on the side supporting love, or the side supporting hate? Please sign AB 43 and support the freedom to marry.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - the tide is turning

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I’m just a simple guy, but even I can see that the tide is turning against the opponents of equality.

A Time magazine article published today contains interesting polling data: 90% of non-Christians call Christians too anti-homosexual but a shocking 80% of Christians think that they themselves are being too anti-homosexual.

In 2007, opponents of equality couldn’t get enough support to stop marriages in Massachusetts, ban Domestic Partnerships in Oregon or even put a new (constitutionally-effective) version of “Proposition 22″ on the ballot in California.

The legislature saw this coming two years ago when they sent the country’s first pro-gay-marriage bill to your desk. Then, they got reelected and passed another bill to end the special exclusion of same-sex couples from the security of marriage.

It must say something that the last anti-gay law was seven years ago, while two pro-gay bills have come to your desk in the past two years. The tide is turning, Governor. Do you want to be on the side supporting love, or the side supporting hate? Please sign AB 43 and support the freedom to marry.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - sharing helps out when two worlds collide

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Yesterday, we went to Disneyland for the Tenth Annual Gay Days celebration. While I was hanging out with people who are going to be working really hard over the next few election cycles to keep those who veto their families out of public office, I wondered how people who disagree about things eventually get along.

Looking around, I saw a lot of people having a good time. Apparently, as long as one group doesn’t specially reach out to interfere with another, things go great.

Whether it is a water fountain or a wedding, “sharing” is something we learned in kindergarten that still works in the real world. I wish you would “share” access to marriage by signing AB 43 and supporting the freedom to marry. It’s the only way we can even agree to disagree.

Yours,

Today’s letter - successful "shack-ups" undermine all marriages

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I want to get married, but I’m running into more and more people who just want to “shack up” without making that commitment. I am starting to think that the decline of marriage might be inspired by the many same-sex couples who have been forced to build their families without the safety and security of marriage, yet have done so with such success.

Many of our friends ask me and my permanent boyfriend for marital advice, which we happily supply, but I actually felt a bit guilty last week when a friend of mine from high school told me that he and his girlfriend decided to merely live together because of how well my ten-year relationship works without marriage.

Even public couples such as Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie cite gay relationships as reasons for not getting married. It’s so popular that Senator Carol Migden introduced a bill that would give California couples the rights of marriage without the responsibilities. She calls it “Domestic Partnership.”

If you believe that couples in a relationship should get married instead of “living in sin” then you should sign AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, and change the gold standard for successful relationships from “domestic partnerships” to marriages.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - nobody likes a bigot

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I am a former Scout Leader, and I think that you should sign AB 43 and support the freedom to marry.

Membership in the Boy Scouts has declined 35% since 1977, while the Girl Scouts lost just 3% of their membership in the same period. The big difference? The Boy Scouts squandered their money and legacy with expensive court fights to win the right to discriminate, then they used that ‘right’ to throw out members who have minority religious beliefs and sexual orientations. Nobody wants their kids to grow up in an environment that teaches hate, and they vote with their feet.

California - and the GOP - is in a similar situation. They are fighting for the right to discriminate and using that ‘right’ to exclude families like mine from marriage. This probably pads their pocketbook with fat donations from hard-line bigots, but in the long run, companies and individuals will relocate to places where their lesbian and gay neighbors and friends have the freedom to commit to marriage.

Please sign AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, like the legislature and people have asked you, and stop California from teaching neighbors to hate.

Yours,

Today’s letter - The Last Thing We Need

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

You have argued that AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, is unnecessary.

What was unnecessary was asking the Attorney General to invalidate my marriage in 2004; vetoing the first Freedom to Marry bill in 2005; vowing to veto AB 43 before the Senate had even voted it; and using a seven-year-old law about states rights as an excuse for allowing discrimination on your watch.

What is most unnecessary of all, though, is a ban that keeps people from getting married and churches from marrying them.

Please sign AB 43 and get rid of the unnecessary and offensive ban on freedom that the legislature installed in 1977 and that you have perpetuated throughout your rule.

A veto - and the divisive hatred that it emboldens - is the last thing we need.

Yours,

Today’s letter - Elected to Lead, not to Read

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

As President Schwarzenegger in The Simpsons Movie, your character says “I was elected to lead, not to read.”

You don’t have to read to know that it is wrong to prevent couples who want to, from making the commitment of marriage.

Please lead us towards the freedom to marry by signing AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act.

Thank you for reading and leading,

Today’s letter - 254 signatures and 10 vetos

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

So far this year you have signed 254 bills into law, and vetoed just 10. I am pleased that you agree with the legislature on so many things.

I hope you also agree that all California couples deserve the same freedom to marry that you and Maria enjoy, and that you sign AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act.

Who can disagree about freedom?

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - Nature or Nurture, it’s Love

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I’ve only lived in California for eight years, and I love the state, but I believe it could be even better if same-sex couples had the same freedom to marry as everybody else.

Those who disagree with me have often said that they don’t want to reward a behavior, begging the question: is homosexuality genetic or learned?

The answer to that question is that it doesn’t matter. We used to have barriers to marriage that were based on race, and there are still churches that will not marry across faiths. In both cases our Government has had the wisdom to step out of the way of love.

It is time for Government to stop blocking same-sex couples who want to commit to marriage. Whether it’s nature - like race - or nurture - like religion - it is the same love that everybody else has. It should be treated the same way.

Please sign AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, not out of pity, but out of respect for people’s individual choices about who they love. That is the kind of state California is, and with your assent, can continue to be.

Today’s letter - Hate is shrinking your base

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

As a voter of conscience, I don’t understand how anybody could pop a chad for a Republican. Last night’s slap at people of color piggybacked months of campaigns against Hispanic and Latino workers and years of attacks on lesbian and gay families.

Of these offenses, I don’t think any are as pronounced or as harmful to the GOP as their campaign against the freedom to marry. While African-American and LGBT voters are each roughly 7% of the voting population, 91% of LGBT voters cast ballots in the last presidential election. But those are direct votes.

When your party says - in your party platform - that my California Domestic Partner and I shouldn’t be allowed to get married because our genitals make us worse parents than Britney Spears and Kevin Federline, it alienates not only us, but also everybody who has ever met us. Currently, 75% of children are being raised in ‘non-nuclear’ families like ours - the kind you say are incapable of raising kids. 75% of families is a big base to permanently lose.

Just last week, former Republican congressman Jack Kemp told the Washington Post “What are we going to do — meet in a country club in the suburbs one day? If we’re going to be competitive with people of color, we’ve got to ask them for their vote.”

Think you’re above it all? Hardly. In 2004 you successfully lobbied the Attorney General to invalidate my marriage, in 2005 you vetoed AB 849 which would have let us wed, and now you’re on the verge of vetoing AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act.

All my California Registered Domestic Partner and I want to do is raise our kids with the simplicity and security of marriage. You and your party have worked your hardest to prevent that fairness and freedom. It is something that me, my family, my friends, my coworkers and my church are going to remember when they vote.

Let me once again ask you to give us some options at the polls: please sign AB 43 into law instead of vetoing your party further down the sewer.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - Domestic Partnerships are bad for Heterosexuals too

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I’ve written to you in the past about AB 43 which would allow same-sex couples to choose between marriage and Domestic Partnership, but today I want to write to you about a reciprocal bill - SB 11 - which would give all opposite-sex couples the option to choose Domestic Partnership instead of marriage.

Heterosexuals couples over 62 years old can already choose Domestic Partnership instead of marriage but SB 11 would remove the age restriction and let anybody who can get married get Domestic Partnered instead.

I actually agree with Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families (CCF) and an infamous Opponent of Equality, who said “Awarding marriage rights to people who shack up but refuse to get married is completely ridiculous. Why get married if you can get all the legal rights and benefits of marriage without being committed? This bad bill severely weakens the institution of marriage and will motivate unwed parents to remain uncommitted.”

SB 11 is a reciprocal bill to AB 43, and the reciprocal truth applies: why ban people who are “shacking up” from the commitment of marriage? Why would you motivate (or force) unwed parents to remain uncommitted? Just as SB 11 weakens marriage, AB 43 strengthens it by allowing committed couples to commit to each other.

My California Domestic Partner and I have been “shacked up” and “uncommitted” for way too long. I wish you would let us access the safety and security of marriage just like everybody else: please sign AB 43.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - Once again, Domestic Partnership is not the same as Marriage

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I’m just a normal guy trying to be the best father I can. Something has to really upset me to get me to write a letter. You accomplished that when you said that Domestic Partnership is the same as marriage.

You make me feel me frustrated because anybody with the sense God gave geese knows that they’re different. Domestic Partnership isn’t enough to satisfy the people who are forced into them, and it’s too much to satisfy the Opponents of Equality. In the meantime taxpayers are forking out to maintain a separate set of laws governing relationships and everybody is confused because there is no simple definition of a relationship.

I have to admit that when my California Domestic Partner and I got Domestic Partnered over a photocopier in the Glendale Galleria, it was not the happiest moment in my life. It was more like a trip to the dentist. But when we were eloped in San Francisco in 2004, my mother cried because she couldn’t make it in time to see her son get married. That’s the power a word has.

Obviously, you wouldn’t exclude people from marriage if you didn’t think that Domestic Partnerships were equal. Even you know that would be wrong. I’m here to tell you that they are not equal, not even separate-but-equal. They are demeaning and humiliating by their very design - the verbal and political equivalent of South Africa’s Townships and the pyramids of Abu Ghraib. When you say they are the same, you are wrong: not only technically incorrect but also ethically bankrupt.

You don’t have to sign AB 43 to support the freedom to marry, but as long as you pretend that Domestic Partnerships are the same as marriage, you are doing yourself and the people of California a grave disservice.

Sincerely,