Three Cheers for Equality

Maine and Maryland voters have legalized same-sex marriage, joining Massachusetts as “M” states that allow it. Coincidentally, those are the first three “M” states, alphabetically. Can Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri and Montana be far behind? Sadly, the answer is probably yes. But still, SSM opponents can no longer fall back on the claim that it’s never been approved by popular vote. Suck it, bigots.

Washington’s SSM referendum still too close to call, but was leading in the early hours. They already have civil unions that are legally marriage in all but name, so i’ve assumed voters won’t find it too big a step to take.

And in Minnesota the proposal to put the state’s statutory ban on SSM in the state constitution appears to have lost as well.

Meanwhile in Iowa, the effort to unseat the remaking state Supreme Court justice judge from the group that unanimously ruled in favor of SSM there survived his retention election. Last time several of those justices were booted, but the drive to get them all off has stalled. Not that it matters legally, probably, since it’s doubtful anyone would have standing to file a lawsuit challenging SSM, but politically it makes a point.

21 years ago my friend, Bill, told my new bride and me that he wanted his wedding to be just like ours. I never imagined such a thing would be possible for him, or so many others. I can’t adequately express my joy at the way this is turning out.

About James Hanley

James Hanley is former Associate Professor of Political Science at Adrian College and currently an independent scholar.
This entry was posted in The Democratic Process and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Three Cheers for Equality

  1. “I never imagined such a thing would be possible for him, or so many others. I can’t adequately express my joy at the way this is turning out.”


  2. lumbercartel says:

    Alas, none of the people I know personally who would benefit from this live in the enlightened States (hey, I’m in Arizona!)
    But just because the dawn is a while away doesn’t mean I can’t take joy from the light in the East.

  3. Troublesome Frog says:

    As a Californian, I’m seriously bummed at how badly we dropped the ball on this one. Ten years ago, if you had to guess who would be first, we would have been near the top of the list. Now look at us.

  4. James Hanley says:

    T-Frog, I suspect you’ll be there soon, regardless of the Prop 8 lawsuit’s outcome.

  5. Lancifer says:


    Most Hispanic cultures have a very strong anti-gay bias. It may be that this will prevent SSM from being instituted in California for a while to come.

    Here in Indiana I doubt the advent of SSM is nigh. Indiana statute (DOMA) (SJR15, HJR7 and HJR 8) states that: “Only a marriage between one (1) man and one (1) woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Indiana. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.” This law came into effect in 2004.

    Since then there have been attempts to get an anti-gay marriage amendment into the state constitution. Luckily those efforts have failed. Recent polls suggest that there is actually a slight majority of Hoosiers that favor SSM but the slight minority is hell-bent on keeping” them damn queers” from getting married.

    My evangelical Christian father still calls homosexuals “queers” and I kid him that they sometimes refer to themselves as queers to “own” the term. How he or anyone else thinks two people of the same sex getting married somehow damages heterosexual marriage is beyond me.

    He actually bristles if you suggest it is bigotry to deny homosexuals the right to marry. He puts it in the old “the bible says so” category and refuses to discuss it beyond that point.

    I honestly think he will never get it. But he is old and has had a stroke so I don’t push it too much. I think the tide is turning, even here in the “bible-belt”, and it’s only a matter of time.

Comments are closed.