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 - Germany’s apology

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

“Germany wants to honor the persecuted and murdered victims, to keep alive the memory of the injustice they suffered,” and provide “a lasting symbol against intolerance and hostility towards gays and lesbians and against their alienation.” Those words (or in German, probably one really long word) are on a plaque on a new monument in Berlin.

Nazi Germany’s campaign against homosexuals began in 1933 and by 1945 more than 50,000 men were convicted and separated from their liberty and property. It is estimated that between 5,000 and 15,000 of them were sent to concentration camps. Gay men (and those perceived to be gay) were forced to wear pink triangles and were sometimes used as medical guinea pigs.

Unlike other groups of Nazi victims, the persecution of the gay community continued under the same law, with more than 50,000 convictions before a 2002 government pardoned them and finally abolished the legislation.

Here in America, we like to think that we are better than the Third Reich, yet in 2008 we still convicting our own citizens of being gay, forcing them to wear “domestic partnerships” and separating them from the financial and social stability that only the time-tested law of marriage can provide.

It is urgent that this ostracism, bullying and unequal treatment end. Please continue to support the freedom to marry and the downfall of the Constitutional Amendment to Limit Marriage.

Yours,

Today’s stamp: Wolverine from X-Men. Little is known of Wolverine’s past, but we do know “those who forget their past are doomed to relive it.” Wolverine uses his skills to help protect a world that hates and fears mutants like himself.

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 - squandering a 158-year tradition

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I’ve written to you before about the struggle I’ve been having with explaining the special ban on same-sex marriages to my kids, and especially how the Opponents of Equality come to California to throw money, time and mindshare at preventing certain people they have never met, who cause absolutely no harm, from making the fundamental decision of who they marry.

What does one say? “There are some people who hate your daddies so much that they come from across the country to keep them from getting married?” Or perhaps “There are some people who don’t want to share. Remember what we learned about sharing?” Clearly, neither truth would be responsible parenting.

After a 158 year tradition of liberty and tolerance ensconced in the California Constitution, it sure would be a shame to lose that all in a heated moment of intolerance.

Dan Hawes, an organizer with the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, explains “There is a real sense of hope and possibility here because of the upcoming Supreme Court ruling. The fact that [hard-won freedom] could be taken away in five months is really painful for people who want to marry.”

Please, for my kids and all Californians, give us some moral guidance. Explain to the people that the only right thing to do is to uphold our Constitution that says that nobody should be picked out and treated differently because of what they think or what they believe. That is a tradition of neighborly love, not neighborly hate. That is something I can explain to my kids.

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 - traditional marriage

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

When President Gerald R. Ford was running for his first term in congress in 1948, he delayed his marriage to Elizabeth Warren until after the election because he was worried that voters would punish him for marrying a divorced woman.

That was “traditional marriage” back then: you got one try to get it right, and after that you were ‘defective’ and couldn’t even take communion at church.

Much has changed in fifty years. Now Tom Cruise can get married as many times as he wants to, and nobody bats an eye. Obviously “traditional marriage” is simply a social and economic construct that unites two people and their families according to their individual choice.

Governor, would you help bring “traditional marriage” back to the people, by allowing all of the people of California to marry the person that they want to?

If Gerald Ford can marry a divorced woman and be elected President, I should have the freedom to marry the person I love, whether they are a felon, foreigner, divorcee, widower, ugly, white, Catholic, Republican, or – in my case – male.

Yours,

Today’s letter - an example of sex out of wedlock

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

As a parent I was disgusted with the latest CDC study that revealed that one in four teenage girls are infected with at least one sexually transmitted disease.

It seems strange that the more obsessed we are with blocking gay marriage, the more teenagers are having sex out of wedlock. Maybe it is time for a change of course?

I wish you would advocate marriage as a way to encourage monogamy, instead of using it as a weapon to punish California’s lesbian and gay citizens for wanting to make the commitment of marriage.

You don’t protect our children by “protecting marriage.” You protect them by giving their parents the tools they need to be good parents. Please give us the freedom to marry.

Yours,

Today’s letter - protest pending

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

This Valentines Day, it will have been four years since my husband and I were married in San Francisco. Because our union was rudely annulled by your administration, and subsequent legislative efforts were blocked by your veto, I will be marking the occasion by joining other fair-minded Californians at my county courthouse begging you for the privilege to get married again.

We have come so far: my finance and I have been together for almost eleven years; we have been domestic partnered for eight; we have two wonderful children and a pretty nice life.

You might ask why I need to spend my anniversary asking for the freedom to marry - again? All I can ask you to do is to think back to your wedding and tell me how you would feel if that was made illegal. If some government authority stepped in and said your vows were meaningless, your relationship second-rate and your legal filings null and void.

No matter what you think about gay marriage, all Americans are entitled to the freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness. And that includes the freedom to marry the person they love.

It is important to me, and to my fellow countrymen that no government takes away that freedom. It would be wrong to do anything on the day that stands for love to stand up for love.

Yours,

CC: one of the marriage licenses that you annulled

Today’s letter - Merry Christmas

[We sent The Governor our Christmas card, which shows me and my financee holding our two kids in front of the snow-covered castle at Disneyland. The kids are dressed as Mr. and Mrs. Claus in red jackets with white trim and matching hats.]

Governor Schwarzenegger -

Wherever you are, may you have a white Christmas and a joyous 2008.

[handwritten] Thank you for signing the bills last year that protect and nurture our family, and please help us to get the freedom to marry in 2008.

[signed by us all].

Today’s letter - Thank God for Happiness

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Happy Thanksgiving!

At the dinner table this afternoon my mother told me that her friend Harold had shown her pictures of his grandchildren for the first time last week. She said that he hadn’t wanted to show them because he felt bad that they would “never have grandkids of their own.”

If I had been less blessed, I would have never have found my ’soulmate,’ been Domestic Partnered and pursued surrogacy, and they wouldn’t have grandkids. But life has been bountiful for me. My parents are grandparents, and now they are happy for Harold, Harold is happy for them, and I am happy that they are happy. Yeah happy!

On this day of giving thanks, I want to thank you for giving California an environment where lesbian and gay families can exist, and giving me the freedom to ask my government to get off of my back and let these couples wed. Please support the freedom to marry, and make more happy people.

Yours,

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,

Today’s letter - freedom to marry is the Christian thing to do

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

As a Christian, I believe that all couples should be able to get married, and that my Church should have the freedom to perform the ceremonies that it believes in.

Unfortunately, California’s ban on gay marriage, installed by the legislature in 1977, blocks same-sex couples from getting married and churches from marrying them.

Jesus was silent on the issue of homosexuality, but he was crystal clear on the sin of judgment. As Luke described in last Sunday’s gospel, “29 And people will come from east and west, and from north and south, and recline at table in the kingdom of God. 30 And behold, some are last who will be first, and some are first who will be last.” (Luke 13:22-30).

AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, would end government-sanctioned judgment and let committed gay couples get married just like everybody else.

We can disagree about God’s opinion of homosexuality, but we must agree on the right to follow God in our own ways. Please sign AB 43 and give us freedom instead of legislated salvation.

Yours in Christ,

Today’s letter - The Party of Lincoln should support freedom to marry

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,

As a Republican, I believe all Californians deserve the freedom to marry.

We can’t focus on free enterprise, getting the government off your back, lowering taxes and strengthening the military when we have people preaching salvation through legislation and denying freedoms to get there. It always backfires and undermines the party.

Abraham Lincoln anticipated this when he said

“Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves.”

California’s lesbian and gay couples have struggled and overcome the stigma of predatory stereotyping our party has wrongfully promulgated. They have built their families from love like everybody else. Our party shouldn’t be standing in the way of their freedom to marry.

Please sign AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, and give the freedom to others that we all so desperately deserve.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - teasing my kids

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

As the father of two six-month old children, I believe my partner and I should have the freedom to marry.

Our kids have two dads, and like all kids they will be teased about something. Letting same-sex couples get married just like everybody else means they will have one less thing to be teased about. They won’t have any idea how much social stigma we had to overcome to bring them to school, because having two parents who are married is no big deal.

As a fellow parent (who happens to be governor), you can make it happen: please sign AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, and let me and my California Registered Domestic Partner get married, just like everybody else.

Many thanks,

Today’s letter - First comes Love

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

The rhyme goes:

First comes love (we met June 22, 1997)
Then comes marriage (we were married in San Francisco on Valentines Day 2004)
Then comes baby in the baby carriage (we had twins - a boy and a girl - in March)

We did everything right! But our marriage was annulled by the state and now we’re reduced to groveling for our equivalent legal rights through the domestic partnership system.

Now won’t you do what’s right? California should have one word for marriage: “marriage.” Please sign AB 43 and give us back our marriage.

Today’s letter - Lessons from Spain

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

As you consider your position on AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, you might like to hear from some people I consider to be real leaders who were in a situation very similar to yours.

Spain’s path to marriage equality was much faster than Canada’s. Their prime minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, advocated marriage parity and survived an election doing so, with 61% of Spaniards supporting full marriage. These are the words he used to do it:

I will never understand those who proclaim love as the foundation of life, while denying so radically protection, understanding and affection to our neighbors, our friends, our relatives, our colleagues. What kind of love is this that excludes those who experience their sexuality in a different way?
- May 11, 2005

It is time to bring to an end, once and for all, the intolerable discrimination still suffered by many Spaniards exclusively by virtue of their sexual preferences.

Homosexuals and transsexuals deserve the same public consideration as heterosexuals and have the right to live freely the life that they themselves have chosen.
- April 15, 2004

He is my new hero. You have some work to do. Please consider as a start signing AB 43 when it reaches your desk.

Yours,

Today’s letter - Religious Freedom

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I’m writing today to ask you to consider Californian’s religious freedom when AB 43, the 2007 “Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act” reaches your desk.

Congregations like St. Monica’s Catholic Church - where you go - should be able to exclude same-sex couples from the marriages they solemnize.

However, congregations like The Westwood Hills Congregational Church - right up the road - should also be able to exercise their beliefs and perform same-sex marriages.

California same-sex couples already have all the legal rights of marriage - why are you standing in the way of their religious right to marriage?

Yours,

Today’s letter - Stop Democrats from Bloating Government

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I just watched the Democrats address the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered community in their ‘debate’ on Logo. I was horrified to see them advocate strong hate crime, employment nondiscrimination and civil union laws as the solution to this community’s situation.

I wish Republicans like you would enter this debate and present a solution that does not bloat government and reduce employer liberties: full access to marriage without gender restrictions.

You can start by signing AB 43. This law will advance freedom and liberty for California and set a model for the next President to follow - smaller government, lower taxes and full equality for all citizens.

Thank you in advance,

Today’s letter - Undefining Marriage

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

From 1850 to 1977, California marriage law contained no reference to ‘man’ or ‘woman.’ AB 43, The Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, simply would restore the common-sense language that was in our Family Code for 127 years: “Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between two persons.”

I don’t know what made us redefine marriage in 1977, but government-imposed limits on personal freedom have no place in the 21st Century. Please sign AB 43 and get rid of this recent and arbitrary restriction.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - Equality of Opportunity

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I was hoping as my closest Republican elected official that you could help me with something.

The Rules Of The Republican Party begins:

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Republican Party is the party of the open door. Ours is the party of liberty, the party of equality of opportunity for all and favoritism for none.

My California Registered Domestic Partner, two children and I feel a little left out of the party.

Could you please sign AB 43 not only to give our family liberty and equality of opportunity, but also to show that the Republican Party is indeed the party of the open door?

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - First state to eliminate racial restrictions should not be the last to eliminate gender restrictions

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

In 1948 California was the first state to remove its ban on interracial marriage. At the time, only one out of ten Americans supported the action.

Alabama was the last state with a ban on the books. They finally removed it in the year 2000, fifty-two years after us. The popular vote was only 60/40 in favor of removing it.

California has missed its opportunity to be the first state with permanent marriage equality, let’s not make it the last. Please sign AB 43 and bring us marriage equality now.

Yours truly,

Today’s letter - Dianne Feinstein

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Today I wrote to Senator Feinstein about her vote on the Judicial Subcommittee that passed along Leslie Southwick to an “up-down” vote on the Senate Floor. There are a lot of similarities to your position on AB 43, the “Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act,” which you want to pass along to an up-down vote of the people.

I was angry with Senator Feinstein because she surrendered her committee’s power and wisdom to an unguided vote by the masses. It is a lot more risky and time-consuming to educate 100 people about Southwick than just nine specialists, thus easier to pass bad nominees.

The same has happened in California. The Opponents of Equality have tricked you into surrendering your power and wisdom to an unguided vote by the masses. That subverts the power that the people have given to their representatives, and undermines whatever wisdom they have accumulated.

I have tremendous respect for the will of the people, but bringing civil rights to an up-down vote has not historically favored minorities. Please use your power and wisdom to show the people how they should treat their fellow citizens. Please sign AB 43.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - Act on your beliefs

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

In 2005, you said “I believe that lesbian and gay couples are entitled to full protection under the law and should not be discriminated against based upon their relationships.”

AB 43, the “Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act,” would bring us one step closer to that laudable goal. Please sign AB 43 and put your beliefs into action.

Yours,

Today’s letter - Proposition 22

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

You have stated that you would veto AB 43, the “Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act,” because it conflicts with the part of the California Family Code that was installed by Proposition 22 in March of 2000.

I was surprised to discover that AB 43 does not conflict one bit. Section 300 of our Family Code says “Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman,” while section 308 deals with marriages from other jurisdictions. Proposition 22 added Section 308.5 and was marketed and sold as defending California from marriages performed elsewhere, as evidenced by its redundant language and subordinate placement. Proposition 22 was never intended to stop civil gay marriage in California, or its makers would have changed Section 300 and the Constitution, not Section 308.5.

If you don’t believe me, you can read the bill. AB 43 was written to specifically fix Section 300. It won’t touch 308.5. If the courts decide this Fall that 308.5 is unconstitutional - as you desire - we need AB 43.

You are free by law - and obligated by the Constitution - to remove the ban on same-sex couples from marriage. Please sign AB 43 and say no to discrimination in this state.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - the people HAVE decided

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

You have said over and over that you want the people to decide the fate of marriage in California. But the people HAVE decided.

They decided against discrimination when they enacted the constitution; they decided when they failed to amend the constitution with Proposition 22, and they decided when they elected and re-elected the legislature that brings you AB 43, the “Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act.”

Now it is up to you to do your job and enforce the people’s will: sign AB 43.

Thank you,

Today’s letter - no problem finding a priest

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

Why is it that my fiancée and I have no problem finding a priest who will marry us and a church that will welcome us, but our government won’t let us wed?

Please help end California’s ban on gay marriage by signing AB 43 and supporting marriage equality.

Sincerely,

Today’s letter - A Long Shot

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger -

I am writing to you to ask you to sign AB 43, even though I know you never will.

I need to know that you have heard from people like me who are directly afflicted; that emboldening the Opponents of Equality will cause more government-sanctioned discrimination; and that showing a lack of leadership on this issue will look pretty silly when California eventually ends domestic apartheid. Your domestic apartheid.

I fully understand that you want to “let the people decide,” and you will undoubtedly veto this bill. I just want you to know who you’re throwing under the bus when you do.

Sincerely,