Today’s letter - everybody loves a wedding, and nothing less

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

People are asking me, and probably still asking you, why the gays can’t just get Domestic Partnered instead of married.

As my fiancée and I prepare for our wedding next Tuesday, in terms of personal life milestones, it is not a Big Deal. We have already looked each other in the eyes and made our promises to each other. This license and ceremony doesn’t hold much meaning for us. It won’t change our legal rights, and it won’t change our relationship. So we’re getting married in the courthouse on the first day that we can.

But as somebody who has “jumped the broom” and domestic partnered, let me tell you that there is a world of difference in the way other people treat a marriage. A wedding is a Big Deal. Friends and family are getting upset that we hadn’t invited them; the in-laws are griping that we’re doing this in Orange County instead of closer to them; the rector at our church told us that she is upset that we aren’t allowing her to perform the ceremony; and my fiancée is out buying new tuxes and rings.

Nobody was this interested when we were getting Domestic Partnered. So when people ask you not to call it marriage, think back to your own wedding to Maria. Who would have come to a “domestic partnership?”

Whether people want to get married in the Central Library or a quiet courtroom, the Golden Rule still says “treat others as you would like to be treated.” Now, finally, you can do that.

Sincerely,

Today’s stamp: “wedding heart.” They don’t make “civil union” heart stamps.

Today’s letter - hate lost, now it’s time to do good

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

As you know, the California Supreme Court has decided that same-sex marriages will proceed, consistent with its ruling and the State Constitution.

In trying to convince the court to postpone the marriages until after a vote in November, the Opponents of Equality, specifically the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund, Proposition 22 Legal Defense and Education Fund and the Campaign for California Families, claimed that “legal chaos” would result if marriage licenses were issued for six months and then blocked by a constitutional amendment. They might be right.

Well, the marriages are proceeding, and they are at risk of being overturned. If the Opponents of Equality truly want to avoid a nightmare scenario of national “legal chaos,” then it is their turn to give a little.

I think it would be sportsman-like and morally right for the Opponents of Equality to end their war against their neighbors and friends by taking the $10 million earmarked for divisive hate politics and contribute it towards healing the sick or feeding the poor. Or perhaps they could focus on the parental notification initiative that might bring a surprising number of allies from the lesbian and gay community.

Governor, please tell the Opponents of Equality – and your Republican colleagues – that fighting against the law of the land, and against California’s families, is unacceptable. Please ask them to end their support of the Constitutional Amendment to Limit Marriage.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - beyond California

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Now that it appears that we might finally have removed the barriers to the freedom to marry here in California, it is time to begin to turn our attention to letting Californians travel to other parts of the country and participate in the federal rights and responsibilities of marriage our state pays into and her citizens deserve.

The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, is the short title of a federal law of the United States passed on September 21, 1996 as Public Law No. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419. Its provisions are codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7 and 28 U.S.C. § 1738C. The law has two effects:

1. No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.

2. The Federal Government may not treat same-sex relationships as marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states.

As you represent California to the rest of the country and the rest of the world, please don’t forget to ask, on behalf of the Citizens who support you, that other places extend the same dignity and respect to California’s citizens that California will always provide to them.

Sincerely,

Today’s stamp: “California Poppy,” representing California to the country and the world.

Today’s letter - form letter is chilling

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

A short time ago, I wrote to you in support of the California Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage. Yesterday I received a form letter response from your office that was very nicely written, however factually inaccurate and intellectually offensive to California families, including mine.

You wrote that “Proposition 22 … stated that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized on California,” but you choose to leave out an important detail: Proposition 22 was added to Section 308.5 of the Family Code. I have attached a copy of the Family Code; Section 308.5 has nothing to do with marriages performed in California.

Section 300 (a) (also highlighted) was actually changed by the legislature in 1977 and signed by then-governor Attorney General Jerry Brown, something the legislation was specifically designed to address, something I pointed out to you almost a year ago, and a fact that the recent Supreme Court decision mentions explicitly.

So when you write that you vetoed the legislative efforts to amend the marriage laws because of the sanctity of voter initiatives, you are not being honest. You could have signed the bills and responded to the legal challenge with the same argument about Section 308.5 and the unclear intent of the voters.

But the worst part of your response to the Supreme Court Ruling is that you will merely “abide by the rulings of the state’s highest court.” It sounds to me like you are a sore loser. I wish you would join the people in celebrating the end of government tyranny in individuals’ personal and private lives.

1. Urge that same-sex marriages commence with all due haste.
2. Prod citizens to contribute to humanitarian efforts instead of limits on marriage.
3. Ask the Republican party to remove offensive language from the party platform.
4. Say all good citizens should vote against the Constitutional Amendment to Limit Marriage.

Sincerely yours,

Today’s letter - it is sometimes right to take away rights

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

When can the Constitution take away the rights of individuals to participate in our economy and society? That was a question that the 9th circuit court decided in the case of Maj. Margaret Witt, an Air Force nurse who cared for injured patients on military flights and in operating rooms for nearly 20 years until she was discharged on the grounds that she had a six-year relationship with another woman, a civilian.

The court did not vacate “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” the policy that was used to oust Witt, but observed that the government may only “intrude upon the personal and private lives of homosexuals” to “advance an important governmental interest,” such as maintaining troop readiness or improving morale – and Witt, in fact, did the opposite.

“Wounded people never asked me about my sexual orientation,” Witt said in a statement. “They were just glad to see me there.”

In response to California’s Supreme Court decision, I wish you would do more than merely “abide” but instead celebrate the end of government tyranny in individuals’ personal and private lives.

1. urge that same-sex marriages commence with all due haste.
2. urge citizens to contribute to humanitarian efforts instead of limits on marriage.
3. ask the Republican party to remove offensive language from the party platform.
4. ask all good citizens to vote in November, but vote against the Constitutional Amendment to Limit Marriage.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - we are better off without bigots

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Eddie Walker, the principal of Irmo High School in Columbia, S.C., announced he will resign from his post after the district approved a gay-straight alliance that supposedly conflicts with his religious beliefs. “Allowing the formation of this club on our campus conflicts with my professional beliefs and religious convictions,” Walker wrote in his resignation.

The club provides support for gay, lesbian and straight students from an often hostile school environment. Reports show that in 2007, 31 percent of gay students were threatened or injured and 18 percent were physically assaulted because of their sexual orientation. The Lexington-Richmond School District could not stop the club from forming because of federal law prohibiting a club from being banned because of religious bias.

“We truly believe it is unfortunate that this principal cannot see the immense harm that is caused when a social climate of rejection, condemnation and violence is justified with misguided religious belief,” said Brent Childers, executive director of Faith in America.

California law now bans prohibiting individuals from getting married because of religious bias. There will undoubtedly be some people who will resign from the County Clerks offices because they are unwilling to uphold the law. When that happens, we must simply remember what President Eisenhower said when he considered ending the traditional segregation of the blood supply into “Colored,” “White–Hebrew,” and “White-Christian” in 1950. The Red Cross told him that the South wouldn’t accept “mixed blood.” Eisenhower replied “then the South will not get any blood!” and issued an executive order ending the practice.

If Eddie Walker doesn’t want a gay-straight alliance at his school, then he is free to leave. “Those who deny freedoms to others deserve them not for themselves.”

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - bigots have no argument against marriage

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I want to give you a window into the constant “buzz” of hatred that pervades my daily life.

A YouTube user named “Danielstwin” commented on one of my YouTube videos saying

“we will see lololo [California’s fag marriages] will be overturned… no fags”

to which I immediately replied

“According to your profile, you are a fan of Ron Paul and his philosophy of libertarianism, and you talk about freedom for everybody. But you won’t let the gays get married. Instead you run around the internet calling people ‘fag’ when they haven’t done anything to you. Abraham Lincoln said “those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves.” If you really want your own freedom - Ron Paul fan - you are obliged to give it to others. You’ll be surprised [by what happens when you give freedom.]

“Danielstwin” followed up with a personal message:

i have many gay friends and mother was a lesbian for years….i have no problem and think fag may have been a little over board. i just get tired of hearing liberals cry over all there bullshit. i am athiust and beleive that only woman and men should be married.. if there was a private island for gays to live and be wed great but there is not and i do not want my kids asking me growing up why are those men kissing. give me a break what is this country teaching are children… you know the facts are the facts a top DNA expert of the usa has said blacks are not as smart as whites and are more barbaric. they cant help it its in there animalistic being.,and he said he can prove it… so why hide this were did this guy go??????? we have been enslaved they freed slaves and endlaved all of us….. well sorry if i offended you but no gay weddings… if men were suppost to be together a man could get pregnant. if you can pull that off i will agree lolol daniel

I was obliged to respond, as I am prone to do.

Greetings, Daniel. If you have many lesbian and gay friends (and close relatives) then you know that they just want to be treated with the same dignity and respect as anybody else.

My husband and I have been together through two of Britney Spears’ marriages. We looked each other in the eyes and made the same promises that every married couple does on Valentine’s Day 2004. We had two kids through a process called gestational surrogacy that was developed to help infertile couples have children. We both did our part as men, and we were just as pregnant as any man can ever be. Our kids were baptized in our Episcopal church and they’re just learning to walk.

Our family knows we are married, our friends know we are married, our church knows we are married, and now finally even our state acknowledges that we are married.

I am probably more tired of liberals crying over their bullshit than even you! I don’t care about rubbing my sexuality into other people’s faces. But I am also tired of seeing my neighbors - and good people like yourself - running around saying that people like me - who happens to believe marriage is about more than sex - are not entitled to their beliefs, or their freedom.

I hope that when your kids see two men kissing, you can teach them that while you might not like it, this is a free country and that those men must love each other a whole lot - just like your parents love each other. Loving somebody doesn’t make somebody less human; in fact, doesn’t it make them more?

What is better, teaching your kids the difference between love and sex, or that it’s OK to run around calling anybody they disagree with a ‘fag?’

Same-sex marriage doesn’t hurt anybody. And let’s face it - if America sent all of her gays to an island, everybody would want to visit!

Governor, I am proud to live in a country where people can express their beliefs and ideas freely without fear of retribution. I am blessed that God gave me the means, wisdom and opportunity to speak back. When I do, I have the power to change hearts and minds; but every time I do, I wonder what citizenship we have been teaching our children that they can claim their freedom to speak, believe and marry, yet stop short of allowing those freedoms to others.

The Constitutional Amendment to Limit Marriage before voters this fall is the test of that citizenship. I pray that California will past the test by defeating the measure, and leave no American behind.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - I expect our government to follow the law

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I discovered something terrible. Our own state Economic Development Department (EDD) has an entire tax unit and legal status called “HUS/WIFE.” The California Business and Professions Code Section 17913 (b) (4) even seems to authorize this, listing options describing the nature of the business as

(i) “an individual,”
(ii) “a general partnership,”
(iii) “a limited partnership,”
(iv) “a limited liability company,”
(v) “an unincorporated association other than a partnership,”
(vi) “a corporation,”
(vii) “a trust,”
(viii) “copartners,”
(ix) “husband and wife,”
(x) “joint venture,”
(xi) “state or local registered domestic
partners,” or
(xii) “a limited liability partnership.”

I don’t know why our EDD doesn’t just use the term “married couple” instead of “husband and wife.” Article 1 Section 8 of our State Constitution says “A person may not be disqualified from entering or pursuing a business, profession, vocation, or employment because of sex, race, creed, color, or national or ethnic origin.” Our 2005 Domestic Partnership legislation ordered this gender specific language to be changed, and it seems as though our State Supreme Court agrees.

The EDD ought to defer to the Family Code for the definition of marriage instead of making up their own. The EDD expects me to follow the law; I expect no less from the EDD.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - the end of tyranny

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

The Opponents of Equality claim that the Supreme Court doesn’t have the authority to interpret the Constitution because “it should be the people who decide.” But then they advocate a measure to change the Constitution! One cannot have it both ways.

Either our Constitution means something and our highest court can interpret it, or our Constitution means nothing, in which case there is no need to change it.

I can understand how some people might stand up and oppose equality for whatever reason; I cannot understand how they can oppose equality, oppose the rule of law, and oppose their neighbor’s freedom and still call themselves American.

Proudly,

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 - you have been terminated!

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Today was a great day. The State Supreme Court overruled you to say that same-sex couples must be given the “respect and dignity” of marriage because the constitutional protections for race and gender also apply to sexual orientation.

The Los Angeles Times quoted me saying “I think this is the beginning of the end of ostracism, bullying, and all the things that used to make people feel less human than others.”

The Los Angeles Times also quoted you – in the paragraph after me, ha ha - saying that you “will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling.” Thank you for that. Thank you thank you thank you. But it is a little late for you to be surrendering your authority over my relationships, after that authority was removed.

Because of the Domestic Partnership legislation that you signed and the Federal “Defense of Marriage Act,” my family is honestly not directly affected by this decision at a legal level. But people don’t get married for the rights: they get married for the social acceptance. This decision – and your support of it – sends the clear message that ALL California couples are welcome to commit to marriage and fully participate in our economy and our society.

The real victory is not for us, it is for every struggling teen who thinks they are different, by bringing them the comfort that there is a way to live their life without celibacy or suicide, and their government – and Governor – will support them.

Today was a great day because the State Supreme Court said “freedom means freedom for EVERYBODY,” and my Governor will (finally) fight to make sure that happens.

No longer Yours,

Today’s letter - permission to marry

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

The President who said that gay Americans are not worthy of marriage had his daughter married off today. I wonder if Henry Hager asked Mr. Bush for permission to marry his daughter? That would be very traditional, and the Bushes seem to be weirdly into what they think is ‘traditional.’

The only thing more daunting than asking the President of the United States for permission to marry might be asking the State Supreme Court for permission to marry. But that is exactly what five couples did after you vetoed their nuptials, and in the next couple of weeks we will get the court’s answer.

It is a shame that adults in this country have to ask other people for permission to marry the person that they love. It is a worse shame that somebody – anybody – would deny it. I feel badly going around you to get this permission, when you ought to be the first to offer it. But it ultimately makes me feel special, because not many people get to ask the Supreme Court for permission to wed.

Yours,

Today’s letter - ignorance is bliss

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Researchers at Hunter College, Rutgers and New York University asked gay Americans if there is a federal “nondiscrimination” law barring the firing of workers based on their sexual orientation. Only six in 10 gay Americans got the right answer (there is not.)

Pat Egan, an assistant professor of politics at New York University, pointed out that “considering this has been the top priority for advocates in Washington for the past 20 years, that is pretty astounding and disappointing,” and went on to call for more education in the Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual community.

The last time the people of California were asked if same-sex couples are as capable and worthy of choosing marriage as their opposite-sex counterparts was in 2000 with Proposition 22. Almost 60% of Californians got that wrong.

Please join me, Governor, in making sure that the people understand that there is nothing wrong with gay marriage – there is everything wrong in denying it.

Yours,

Today’s letter - a great precedent

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

In a development that bodes well for a favorable decision in the same-sex marriage case pending in California’s Supreme Court, today’s Wall Street Journal reported that the highest court of the Presbyterian Church ruled that a Northern California minister had not violated denominational law when she officiated at the weddings of two lesbian couples.

A regional judicial committee had rebuked the Rev. Jane Spahr for performing the ceremony, but the church’s high court cleared her of all wrongdoing.

If the Presbyterian Church can witness and support the commitments of committed couples, perhaps someday our government can too.

Yours,

Today’s letter - the cream of the crop

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

A comprehensive survey of Gay America was released today, with important implications to California.

The researchers at Hunter College, Rutgers and New York University confirmed that gay Americans are considerably more involved in public life than heterosexual Americans, by volunteering more, writing more letters to newspapers and political officials, attending more protests and rallies, and being roughly twice as likely to vote.

Older generation homosexuals prioritized laws against bias crimes and workplace discrimination, and emphasized “freedom from discrimination,” while younger homosexuals placed access to marriage and adoption rights as their highest priorities, and valued “the freedom to live their lives” in similar fashion to heterosexual Americans.

Only about three percent of Americans older than 18 identify themselves as lesbian, gay or bisexual, but the community is concentrated in states that provide them with rights and protections: one in three lives in California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Vermont or Washington.

One conclusion that you could make, Governor, is that if the proposed initiative to ban same-sex couples passes this November, California will lose some of its most active citizens as we migrate to places that are welcoming.

Another is that a Republican party that insists on banning freedoms like adoption and marriage will have difficulty attracting younger participants.

Finally, you might realize 3% of the population is not going to destroy marriage, while building and maintaining two systems of laws that depend on gender for just 3% of the population is not only morally offensive, but also expensive and short-sighted.

Yours,

Today’s letter - my husband

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I’ve been having problems figuring out how to refer to my spouse. A lot of people try to insist that I call him my “registered California Domestic Partner,” but that doesn’t seem right to me.

We have been living as a married couple for ten years, ten months and twelve days; we were officially married at the earliest opportunity, on Valentine’s Day in 2004; we had two kids almost fourteen months ago; this year we even filed joint taxes.

I think I have to refer to my spouse as “my husband.” Anything less would be disrespectful to him and to our relationship, and confusing to the people that don’t quite know what a “partnership” is.

We shouldn’t be making up new words to describe marriages – we should be using the words that society has already defined. I wish you and your administration would do more to help people like me use the right words to describe our relatives and relations. I wish you would explain to the people that blocking same-sex couples from getting married is bad for our economy and our society.

Yours,

Today’s letter - second marriages are immoral

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

We were watching Access Hollywood last night featuring the breakup of Star Jones and Al Reynolds. Their tumultuous relationship gave tabloids the opportunity to explore issues about why people get married, and a chance to speculate about the various motivations of love, money, friendship, children and sex.

What I thought was interesting though was when my domestic partner / fiancée noticed that banning same-sex couples from getting married is just as arbitrary as banning second marriages. Why don’t we ban second marriages?

We don’t ban second marriages – except in the Roman Catholic Church – because marriage is fundamental to uniting families inside a social and economic structure.

So why do we ban same-sex marriages? Is it because their marriages are somehow less fundamental to society and the economy? Or is it to marginalize and punish people for being different?

I think you know the answer to that one, Governor.

Yours,

Today’s letter - felons aren’t that bad after all

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I noticed that in order to meet combat needs, the Army and Marines accepted a total of 861 recruits with felony convictions last year, including manslaughter and sex-crime convictions,

What kind of a message does it send to people when those who kill and abuse their neighbors are given the freedom to marry and serve in the military, while people like me – who just wants to be the best husband and father that I can – are excluded?

I’ll answer that rhetorical question: it says we punish people for the way they were made instead of how they behave.

It is not too late for you to call on the people and the Supreme Court to end the limitations on marriage by letting same-sex couples have the freedom to marry.

Yours,