Actor Richard Gere was furious. He slammed the court's decision, saying there was "no reason" why gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry. To the media, he said: "My brother is gay and he got married in that brief period when gay marriage was allowed in California. He has two great kids and is a wonderful father."

David Gere runs Richard's HIV/AIDS trust.

Although new marriages cannot henceforth be registered, the court allowed the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in California prior to the vote to stand.

But the fight continues.

Two high-profile lawyers have filed a suit with the a federal court claiming that with Proposition 8, California now denies equality to same-sex couples, a right guaranteed by the federal constitution. And what an unlikely pair of lawyers they are.

Theodore Olson was the then-Solicitor General who represented George W Bush in the 2000 "battle of the hanging chads", while David Boies represented Al Gore, the candidate who ultimately lost the presidential election when the US Supreme Court ruled in favour of Bush. Olsen and Boies announced their joint intention to pursue this case 27 May 2009, declaring that Proposition 8 denies gay couples a fundamental right.[1] This case may well reach the US Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, a Californian couple who managed to get married before Proposition 8 was passed is bringing another case to the federal courts. Lawyer Richard Gilbert is representing Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer.

They had previously brought a case in 2004, but in 2006 it was thrown out by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, with the court ruling that the couple did not have legal standing to sue over federal laws against same-sex marriage because the pair had not attempted to acquire any federal benefits of marriage, such as filing a married income tax return.

Now that they are married under Californian law, presumably they will be attempting to file a joint federal income tax return, which can be expected to be disallowed by the Internal Revenue Service because of the federal law known as "Defense of Marriage Act" forbidding the federal government to recognise same-sex marriages. This refusal will give them a basis to sue. [2]

On a third track, groups like Courage Campaign and Yes! On Equality are starting to organise for a new ballot initiative November 2010 to overturn Proposition 8. However, a lot depends on how confident they are that public opinion will have shifted enough by then.

That attitudes are shifting is not in doubt, but in a ballot, there are other vagaries such as whether people will actually show up at the polling booths to vote. Therefore, to be assured of victory, the pro-equality side needs to know that opinion polls show a comfortable margin in their favour. Would 2010 be enough? Or should they wait to 2012? There aren't any recent opinion polls for California, so it's anybody's guess at this time.

For the United States as a whole, about two in five adults support gay marriage, reported a recent New York Times/CBS News Poll. It found that 42 percent of all respondents said they supported gay marriage, compared with 22 percent in March 2004. [3]

The nationwide telephone survey of 973 adults was conducted in April 2009, and had a margin of error of three percentage points.

Not only is the 20-percentage point advance in the last five years (2004 to 2009) a remarkably fast pace of attitudinal change, but it is likely to continue. The survey found that younger Americans are significantly more supportive of gay marriage than their parents' generation.

57 percent of Americans under the age of 40 supported gay marriage compared to 31 percent of respondents over 40.

 
Singapore?

A future in which most developed countries legally recognise gay marriages is now within sight. How Singapore can remain attractive to talent when we are so out of sync with our major trading partners does not seem to have exercised the brains of the ostriches in the sand that are our government. Nor how we can persuade emigré Singaporeans to return if they have married their same-sex partners under the law in Western countries – it's already happening, in case you don't know.

Here we are happily censoring any news or entertainment programs that are gay-positive, in line with the official policy of keeping homophobic attitudes intact. How are we going to deal with married gay couples and their children, when we still have the law criminalising male-male sex?

 
China

A Beijing couple pose in front of Qianmen for their "wedding" photo.

China too is nowhere close to legalising same-sex marriages, but the Beijing LGBT Center is issuing its own officially-not-recognised marriage certificates. And the interesting thing is that a widely read online newspaper, in China itself, is reporting this news.

In an article dated 16 April 2009, China Daily wrote: In a nation where same-sex marriages are not legal, Comrades (gays) and Lalas (lesbians) are trying to find colorful formats to fulfill their wedding fantasies, according to people familiar with their communities."

Pointing out the "ritualistic significance" of weddings in Chinese culture, the story told of Beijing senior mechanic Wang Zhiyong who threw a small reception for relatives and close friends when he married his partner, and of a professional wedding planner who designed his own wedding to his boyfriend to be "a feast for both the eye and the stomach."

There are also those who "travel abroad and marry in regions where same-sex marriage is legal," the newspaper said.

Five readers' comments were appended to this online article (up till 30 May 2009). The second comment purportedly came from a Singaporean -- and from the way he abbreviated "Singapore" into "S'pore", he does indeed seem Singaporean.

1. Paul, 16 April 2009: Congratulations! Marriage should be legal for all. Good for China.
      
2. singa 18 April 2009: Overseas Chinese born in S'pore condemn all form of gay and lesbian marriages. In ancient China, any form of gay and lesbian activities will be put to death. I support such drastic actions to preserve social order.
      
3. Gabriel 19 April 2009: Homophobic always go side by side with ignorance and brutality, as Mr/Mrs Singa demostrated here. I feel sorry for him/her for the lack of education on Chinese history and humanity.
      
4. qingqing 20 April 2009: China published "the human rights action plan" on 13th April, and I don't know whether homosexual marriage was wirtten in this action plan. I support our goverment legalize homosexual marriage, because it is human rights too.
      
5. Wilson 21 April 2009: Quoting Singa 2009-04-18 11:22 "Overseas Chinese born in S'pore condemn all form of gay and lesbian marriages. In ancient China, any form of gay and lesbian activities will be put to death. I support such drastic actions to preserve social order."...Speak for yourself! What kind social order are you talking about? The world without people like you will be a much better world. People like you are the trouble makers and should be dealt with. Go back to your ancient world and don't stirring up the anti-gay emotion.

Granted, five comments is a small sample. But as luck would have it, there had to be one Singaporean voice among them, a silly dolt arrogantly trying to represent all Chinese in Singapore, and showing the world how backward this little hole is. 

More foolishly, he tried to tell China about Chinese culture: "In ancient China, any form of gay and lesbian activities will be put to death," he wrote. It is absolute rubbish. Not only is that completely untrue, historians and researchers have catalogued numerous instances when homosexual love was celebrated in art and poetry. Many emperors and court officials had their love affairs recorded in official histories as well, not always in positive ways -- some records spoke of officials badly distracted by their beautiful boys (while others were badly distracted by beautiful girls) -- but the point is, homosexual affairs seemed to have been recognised as a part of life. This continued for over 2,000 years, reaching a peak of liberalism in the Ming dynasty. It was the following Qing dynasty, gradually influenced by an encroaching West,  that enacted a law against homosexuality, though it didn't seem to have been used, according to records. [4]

We think Singapore is an intelligent, advanced country. Looking at what a fool Singa made of himself, I think the opposite is true.

© Yawning Bread