Posted on 02/15/2004 9:21:34 AM PST by Houmatt
SAN FRANCISCO - Gay and lesbian couples from across the country answered this city's Valentine's Day invitation to wed in an unprecedented spree of same-sex marriages that has challenged California law and sent conservative groups scrambling for court intervention.
Hundreds of people lined up Saturday outside City Hall to secure marriage licenses — and then take each other as "spouse for life" in brief vows that have given San Francisco's seat of government the feel of a Las Vegas wedding chapel.
As passing drivers honked and strangers passed out roses, those waiting hours in line cheered couples who emerged from the ornate building clutching the controversial marriage licenses.
"It's finally somebody saying, 'Yes, you can do this,'" said Peter Subers, 57, of Washington County, N.Y., as he stood in line with husband-to-be Rob Bauer, 63.
They already had plans to head to Northern California, but decided Friday on the flight west to marry. Saturday was their 34th anniversary.
It was the third straight day that officials issued the licenses to hundreds of gay and lesbian couples. The response has been so overwhelming that nearly 200 city officials, led by newly elected Mayor Gavin Newsom, have volunteered to pitch in, from sheriff's deputies providing security to clerks processing the licenses.
Rodney Vonjaeger and his partner John Kussmann, both 37, drove overnight from San Diego and arrived at 3 a.m. Saturday.
"We decided if there was ever an opportunity we would do it, so the drive wasn't even a consideration," Vonjaeger said as he waited in line Saturday. They set the hotel alarm for 8 a.m., "but we were up at 7 because of the excitement."
Across the country, other gay couples didn't wait for a marriage license. About three dozen same-sex couples exchanged vows at Philadelphia's LOVE Park on Saturday as part of a "mass commitment ceremony" organized by a gay-friendly church.
Led by a minister, the couples gathered in front of Robert Indiana's famed "LOVE" sculpture — a rainbow flag draped under it — and repeated their vows.
"If they're not going to let us get married, we're going to do it anyway," said Dan Farley, shortly after exchanging silver rings with his partner, John McCann.
Despite legal challenges from advocates of traditional marriage, San Francisco's wedding march is expected to continue throughout the long holiday weekend. By late Saturday, the city had performed over 900 same-sex marriages since the weddings began Thursday.
San Francisco officials said they expected to hand out about 600 licenses Saturday, and by late afternoon had already recorded 270 same-sex weddings.
City officials said they would welcome license applications on Saturday, Sunday and Monday — President's Day — to accommodate couples that have flocked here from places including Oregon, Minnesota, New York and Seattle.
On Friday, a judge denied a petition to block more licenses from being granted. One group of opponents was asked to return Tuesday for a hearing; another group was told to return Tuesday to properly make their request to block the licenses.
"No one made the mayor of San Francisco king; he can't play God. He cannot trash the vote of the people," Randy Thomasson, director of the Campaign for California Families, said at a news conference in Los Angeles.
Aside from the lawsuits, the newly married couples may face other obstacles. After a marriage license is recorded by county officials, it is sent to the state Office of Vital Records. A ballot initiative approved by voters in 2000 said the state would only recognize marriages between a man and a woman.
San Francisco officials have insisted the licenses they have handed out are legally binding, although they are revised to be "gender-neutral." But a deputy city attorney acknowledged that the state may not accept them.
San Francisco appears to be the first city in the nation to officially support same-sex marriage licenses; city clerks in Arizona and Colorado in 1975 issued licenses to gay and lesbian couples that were later revoked or declared void.
Emboldened by the prospect of the nation's first legal same-sex marriages in Massachusetts, gay couples went to courthouses around the nation Thursday and Friday to demand the right to marry. They were quickly turned away.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently ruled that it is unconstitutional to bar gay couples from marriage. Under the decision, the nation's first legally sanctioned gay marriages are scheduled to begin in mid-May.
Lawmakers are proposing a constitutional amendment that would define marriage a union between one man and one woman, and the Legislature resumes its deliberations of amendments on March 11.
Some American couples headed to Toronto Saturday, where gay marriage is legal.
"Canada as a country is more accepting and tolerant, we didn't give it a second thought," said Robin Hanson, a St. Louis doctoral student who was marrying her girlfriend Susan Levin.
The sacred union of man and woman is trans-cultural, trans-historical, and trans-continental.
BTW, is that a royal "our" you use?
Bear in mind that male "gay" relationships are never strictly monogamous, though as a friendship and living arrangement may be truly long-term. Living together, sharing expenses, cruising together. You get the picture.
Female "gay" relationships, on the other hand, are often strictly monogamous. Lesbianism isn't the female equivalent of being a "gay" man, whatever the political alliance. Women aren't men, and if aberrational are still different.
Covenant of marriage is no man-made law, nor is sacrament, nor is ketubah, nor is whatever you want to call it. It is from God and exists without government or for that matter organized religion. It is by definition between a man and a woman.
Civil marriage is the government thing. It is whatever the government wants to call it.
We will have a civil institution of "gay" marriage, not forever but for a while. It will happen soon, whoever is president. Accept this as a fact, but don't stop fighting.
Not sure what you mean by natural law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.