same-sex marriage signed into law in maine

[piranha]

progress marches on in new england. the bill passed relatively smoothly through the legislature, but conservative groups are arming for a ballot initiative in november's elections.

governor baldacci was previously opposed to same-sex marriage, but said his own views evolved over time:

"I did not come to this decision lightly or in haste. I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law, and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage."

matthew daly has some very good thoughts on why this is actually better than california and new york leading the way.

Comments

[katieastrophe]

Would it be awfully picky of me to say that it's not gay marriage but same-sex marriage that has been legalised?

not gay, but same-sex

[piranha]

no, not too picky. i should have watched for that. :) thanks; will fix.

Re: not gay, but same-sex

[katieastrophe]

thankyou :-)

[jd]

I think the meta term now is "marriage equality", if we're going to nitpick ;)

[katieastrophe]

That would imply that any and all marriage, including non-monogamous, was legal, so no, not really ;-)

(I wish, though.)

[djm4]

As you note on his post, one reason it's better than California leading the way is that they haven't. In fact, they've been one of a tiny number of places in the world (can't immediately think of another, but there probably is one) to have retreated on this one, and by popular vote. What the good blue-blooded Democrats of California have told everyone, in fact, is 'don't panic if your legislature tries to impose same=sex marriage on you, you can always overturn it in a referendum, because it's not really supported by the people'.

California and same-sex marriage

[eagle]

As a resident, I feel somewhat compelled to expand on "good blue-blooded Democrats of California" a bit, since it is somewhat important for understanding how this particular issue (and a lot of other things) work in California.

First off, California has at least two major and very different political constituencies, probably more like five. The general political stereotype of California shown in the news and outside of California only really exists in the SF Bay Area, which is a small minority of the state voters. A lot of the external-to-California discussions of California politics don't seem to be aware of the huge central valley farming areas, which are fully as conservative, possibly more so, than Texas.

It's worth bearing in mind that Rush Limbaugh got his radio start in California on a Sacramento radio station.

Second, a significant component of the Democratic Party in California is Hispanic, and a significant percentage of the Hispanic population of California is Catholic, who tend to be more conservative on social issues. I think they're coming around, just like I think the whole country is coming around, but it takes time.

California is a bigger tent than it looks like from outside. There were a whole bunch of reasons why the same-sex marriage ban passed. Yes, some of that was apathy among "blue-blooded Democrats" who didn't vote in the numbers that one would have hoped on the proposition, but it's only a part. There are a lot of different groups in California with different basic political takes; it's nowhere near as politically consistent as most of the New England states.

The good news is that polls are showing steadily increasing support for same-sex marriage. We passed the same damn ban by a much larger margin a decade or so ago. The debate currently is over whether it's better tactically to try to legalize same-sex marriage in 2010 or 2012, but people are feeling fairly optimistic that it will happen sooner or later.

Re: California and same-sex marriage

[jd]

And we may not even have to wait until then, depending on how the court decides on prop 8.