Another reason the CA decision hurts gay people

LGBT people who have applauded last week’s California Supreme Court decision implementing same-sex marriage should think very carefully about the following sentence from the decision:

Because the California Legislature already has enacted a comprehensive
domestic partnership law which broadly grants to same-sex couples virtually all of
the substantive legal rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex married couples,
plaintiffs have been relieved of the burden of successfully prosecuting a
constitutional challenge to obtain those substantive rights and benefits.

In other words, the “marriage equality” side had a much lower burden of proof because of California’s domestic partnership law. What message does that send to Americans in every other state who want to relieve the distress of same-sex couples but who also believe marriage is a male-female union (I’m thinking people like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, for example)? It seems to me that many such people will now be forced to reluctantly oppose domestic partnerships, civil unions, and all other non-marriage measures to ease the burdens faced by LGBT couples.

The California Supreme Court could have easily reasoned that the fact domestic partnerships were signed into law while same-sex marriage was not shows that Californians want to treat same-sex couples fairly while keeping the longstanding definition of marriage. Instead, in the name of nothing but giving California gays their first-choice moniker (“marriage”), it took a step that will probably make it harder for less progressive states to give same-sex couples any protection at all.

Nice going, guys.

The likely long-term effects of In Re Marriage Cases will be to restrict the progress of the LGBT people who face the most homophobia already in exchange for nothing more than a pat on the head for the gays and lesbians who are already the most free.

You see the “comments” button. Please, please, explain to me why this decision on balance does more good for our community than harm.