I am very happy to announce that the California Supreme Court has just announced its decsision to allow all Californians the Freedom to Marry. You can find the decision here(PDF). More details to follow.
UPDATE: Governor Schwarzenegger has said he "would abide" by the Supreme Court decision and repeated his opposition to the constitutional amendment on the November ballot.
UPDATE 2: You can help fight the marriage initiative by contributing to the Calitics CaliPAC, a blog-based PAC for California. May 15 ActBlue page. CaliPAC will fight against this initiative and all attempts to write bigotry into our law in California. Also, please give to "official" campaign, Equality for All. I'm off to City Hall now to get the reactions of the Mayor and other SF leaders. Media will be available at Calitics.
UPDATE 3: Ok, last one, here's a Facebook group to save marriage equality.
More at Calitics.
A money quote from the decision:
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. (Cf. Perez, supra, 32 Cal.2d 711, 727; Sail’er Inn, Inc. v.
Kirby (1971) 5 Cal.3d 1, 17-19 (Sail’er Inn).)45
Up in Washington, the state Supreme Court based their decision to deny marriage equality on "procreation." The CA Sup Ct ripped that to its logic-free shreds:
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.48
This is truly a momentous day for all Californians and all LGBT Americans. Like the day that Massachusetts ruled in favor of Marriage equality, this will be a day that is remembered throughout history.