Small steps, small steps

In what seems to me a brilliant bit of legal ju-jitsu, the State of California has successfully defended a new state domestic partnership law against a reactionary challenge that it runs counter to a voter-approved measure that limits marriage to one man and one woman. The law is to take effect January 1.

AP for September 8 has the story:

A Superior Court judge in Sacramento upheld a new state law Wednesday that is poised to give gay couples who register as domestic partners nearly all the legal benefits and responsibilities of married spouses. ...

In upholding the new law, the judge largely adopted the reasoning advanced by the state attorney general and lawyers for Equality California, the state's largest gay rights lobbying group, that the institution of marriage is much more than a collection of state-sanctioned duties and rights. As such, it can't be undermined when those duties and rights are changed or expanded to other groups, he said.

"A marriage is no less or more a marriage when government adds or subtracts yet another restriction, duty or benefit exclusive to the marital relationship," he said. "The relationship remains a 'marriage,' in name and nature, nonetheless."

Just wonderful. The gay haters have always argued that marriage must be limited to monogamous straights because it is a "sacred institution," it's special, it stands apart. So the defenders of the domestic partnership law in essence adopted that position, saying that marriage can't be defined by the legal rights and privileges afforded it, so there is no basis for objecting to domestic partners having any of those same benefits! Outstanding.

Footnote: Even though domestic partners will be legally equivalent to married couples with the exception of not be able to file a joint state tax return, still, it's a step short. But there may be something coming on that front as well. The judge in the case

seemed to hint that it won't be long before California follows Massachusetts in legalizing marriage for same-sex partners.

"It is questionable, in light of recent statutes and court decisions, whether the state may articulate a rational basis to deny rights to same-sex couples that are granted to persons who are married," he said.

The steps may be small - but they are steps.