Daddy, Papa and Me

It's been forever and a day since I posted. Sorry, just life (good things!). I'm not going to promise I'll post more (though I hope to), but I have to post today.

Tomorrow the California Supreme Court will rule on our relationship's legal equality. Same-sex marriage or something less.

For Guy and I it's been a long history.

In 1996 we met (though we had known each other before in college) and fell in love.

In December of 1997 we had a commitment ceremony (I used to have a web page of that, don't know where it is now :( )

In 2000, we registered as Domestic Partners in the state of California.

In 2002, we adopted our dear daughter.

In 2004, we were "married" in the San Francisco weddings instigated by Gavin Newsom (and those marriages are the ones that lead to the court case about to be decided tomorrow).

In 2005, our DP was enhanced by the legislature.

Now, in 2008 we'll see if we reach full equality. The rumors are not good. I hope they are false one.s

From THIS four years ago, came....

Several quotes from the 4-3 decision (more info here):

In light of the fundamental nature of the substantive rights embodied in the right to marry — and their central importance to an individual’s opportunity to live a happy, meaningful, and satisfying life as a full member of society — the California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all individuals and couples, without regard to their sexual orientation.It is true, of course, that as an historical matter in this state marriage always has been limited to a union between a man and a woman. Tradition alone,

however, generally has not been viewed as a sufficient justification for perpetuating, without examination, the restriction or denial of a fundamental constitutional right.

and in response to the argument that marriage is for procreation exclusively (Washington State court's argument).

There is, however, no authority whatsoever to support the proposition that an individual who is physically incapable of bearing children does not possess a fundamental constitutional right to marry. Such a proposition clearly is untenable. A person who is physically incapable of bearing children still has the potential to become a parent and raise a child through adoption or through means of assisted reproduction, and the constitutional right to marry ensures the individual the opportunity to raise children in an officially recognized family with the person with whom the individual has chosen to share his or her life. Thus, although an important purpose underlying marriage may be to channel procreation into a stable family relationship, that purpose cannot be viewed as limiting the constitutional right to marry to couples who are capable of biologically producing a child together.

It appears an IMMEDIATE ruling to strike down the ban and to allow marriage immediately:

in light of the conclusions we reach concerning the constitutional questions brought to us for resolution, we determine that the language of section 300 limiting the designation of marriage to a union “between a man and a woman” is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute, and that the remaining statutory language must be understood as making the designation of marriage available both to opposite-sex and same-sex couples. In addition, because the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples imposed by section 308.5 can have no constitutionally permissible effect in light of the constitutional conclusions set forth in this opinion, that provision cannot stand.

Plaintiffs are entitled to the issuance of a writ of mandate directing the appropriate state officials to take all actions necessary to effectuate our ruling in this case so as to ensure that county clerks and other local officials throughout the state, in performing their duty to enforce the marriage statutes in their jurisdictions, apply those provisions in a manner consistent with the decision of this court.

WE ARE MARRIED!!!!!!**

**Stay tuned though, I'm sure there will have to be some legislative work to get our DP converted.

Ouch, San Francisco and the bay area CRUSHED all previous heat records since recorded time yesterday.

It wasn't just very, very hot, the weather service said, it was "excessively hot," and the official excessive heat warning will remain in effect today.

Glad I work in a basement office today. Speaking of heat...

Yesterday was an emotional day. Today I've had some time to think about it.

My considered, deep thoughts?

Wow.

Not much different than yesterday. This is momentous. If you read the decision, you'll see that the language is firm and clear... we are equal Californian citizens and should be treated as such.

This already has some seemingly small on our daily lives, but immediate, impacts that actually mean a tidal change. In the long run, it will have larger legal ones, but for now it's already having some large shifts in meaning and immediate effects.

Well, yesterday my gay agenda was advanced tremendously.

We've made some progress on B (pass ENDA) last year, but still not there, but it's D (Marriage equality in at least 2 states and repeal of federal recognition portion of DOMA law, (Massachusetts has marriage, New York, Connecticut, California and others are considering it either legislatively, in the courts or both. DOMA repeal not yet in works.) that we've made strides by completing half of this task.

But that half needs some help still.

She vomits on your dinner plate.

We were all sitting at supper with one of Emma's friends. Emma was complaining of an upset stomach and we knew something was wrong when she wasn't asking for a snack every 15 minutes as usual. Even at supper she ate only rice and a little peppermint tea. She started acting a bit tired and quiet (very not Emma) and came over and sat on my lap as we sat at the supper table.

She had her head lain on my arm and then... blech (or whatever sound it is), she vomited directly onto my supper plate. She of course has the consideration not to get any at all on the placemat or table :). Needless to say, I lost my appetite.

Poor thing, you know she isn't feeling well when she agrees to go to bed an hour early. I checked for a fever (there is none) and we put her to bed. I hope she feels better tomorrow!

Ask your county clerk if they were a Nazi officer during WWII and had been ordered to gas the Jews, would they? At the Nuremberg trials, they would have been convicted of murder for following this immoral order,"

That is what the group "Save California" says in it's plea to it's members to get county clerks to disobey the court order to allow marriage equality. Now, frankly, I believe that if someone believes strongly enough that a law is 'unjust,' they have every right to disobey that law in protest. They also should face the consequences (sanction, firing, whatever the appropriate response).

But to suggest that the clerk marrying Guy and I is as guilty as the Nazi officer's who obeyed orders to systematically slaughter millions of innocent men, women and children, wow. I knew these anti-gay groups thought we were diseased vermin, but wow...

You know, the silver lining to this? I think it means the opposition has lost the argument.

Well, the blog was nominated (thanks mamacita!) and made finalist of the "Best of Blogs". The blog gets nominated ever so often for a blog award (usually something like LGBT or Daddy blog of course), but never make it to actually win an award. It's no big deal, it's not here for that.. but I won't say it'd be nice!

Hey, so go vote for DP&Me here.

If nothing else but to get me out of the embarrassing "0%-of-the-vote-Mike-Gravel" position.

The sidewalks in front and down the side of our home (on a corner) are about 15 or so feet wide. Code only requires a 4 feet width of sidewalk (as long as it's continuous and straight, not curved).

Currently this is all 3' x 3' concrete pavers (with one square every 30 or feet or so with a tree).

In San Francisco, homeowners are required to upkeep the sidewalks (even though you don't _own_ them), so if there is a crack in one or they need replacing, you pay for it.

Last year we were cited for 36 squares to be replaced...

I've seen this used when talking about McCain, illustrating a point that voting for McCain will be asking for a third Bush term. The two are basically the same.

Pondering this today I thought to myself this isn't quite true.

Those who sacrificed. Memorial Day.

Well, a new poll out suggest that Californians now, for the first time since polling, support marriage equality by a majority. This is good news. It suggests that we have a fighting chance to get the anti-equality amendment defeated in November.

This DailyKos post explains it better, but basically when asked if they support gay marriage, 51% of Californians say they do, 42 say they don't and 7 are undecided. Even better, when asked if they support or oppose the ballot initiative to ban marriage equality, a majority oppose!

It's a slim majority and it whether the ballot initiative fails to quash equality or succeeds will depend on turnout and convincing voters.

To that end:
Get informed.
Make a couple calls to the Governor.
Donate.

My aunt Sandy died yesterday, she was 56. My uncle Al, my father's brother and her husband, died last year (13 months to the day) of a sudden heart attack.

Aunt Sandy was diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer in the fall of 2006. It had spread to her legs (that is how she found it, her hip was hurting when she was running) and other parts. The diagnosis wasn't good, it never is for stage 4 cancer, but Aunt Sandy and Uncle Al were amazing optimists and she, they, felt they could beat this.

Then uncle Al died suddenly in April. He and Sandy had always been health aware, physically active, never smoked, but life and health are random. They had been married for 35 years or so and never had children. Their nephews and nieces and neighbor kids were their children (something I will always love, respect and remember them for). They were soulmates. If I were to wax spiritual or sentimental, I'd say that Al's heart couldn't bear living without his soulmate and it broke.

Aunt Sandy carried on her usual optimistic self. She was going to beat it. I had a long lunch with her a few months ago when I was out there for a visit. She was so upbeat. She admitted of course to missing Al terribly, but put on a strong face. I could tell though that half of her life was missing.

The last I talked to her she of course was making plans for the future. We were making plans about putting together a book of memories for Al, planning for her to come visit San Francisco. We tried to talk a while ago, but phone tagged about 4 times.

She finally succumbed to her disease and passed away last night. I wished I had pushed those plans a bit more, saw her a bit more, talked to her more.

I will miss her terribly, and Al... "Al and Sandy" have always been a unit in my heart and my speech. Al and Sandy are home now, wherever that is. I will always remember them and cherish that memory.