In N.C., dare we hope?

CHAPEL HILL -- Last week the California Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated ruling on whether gay and lesbian couples have the right to marry in that state. In a 4-3 decision, the court overturned a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, saying that domestic partnerships and civil unions, no matter how many legal protections they provide for, are simply not equivalent to the M-word.

What does this mean? For gays and lesbians like myself (even if we don't live in California) it's a monumental ruling, both politically and personally.

To read the court's opinion that the designation of marriage as an institution "between a man and a woman is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute" is breathtaking, especially coming from a court with a 6-1 majority of Republican appointees. The unambiguous language seemed to leave nothing to chance: "[California] now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation."

For so many of us who have known that sexual orientation has no bearing on our ability to have -- or not have -- loving partnerships and families, it's one thing for it to be self-evident and quite another to read it in a Supreme Court opinion from the nation's most populous state. My e-mail box has been flooded with notes of joy and amazement: "This is one of the biggest victories the Gay and Lesbian rights movement has seen in our entire history." "I still have goose bumps from hearing the news!!" "We won!!!!"

WHAT THE RULING MEANS IN ITS MOST LITERAL READING is that same-sex couples in California can now obtain marriage licenses, and barring any future court stays, the state will start performing civil marriages in 30 days. For many, it will be the coming of the Summer of Love. At the same time, the justices made clear that churches or other religious institutions do not have to recognize or perform ceremonies for same-sex couples.

Closer to home, Ian Palmquist, executive director of Equality NC, a gay-rights advocacy group, noted in a phone interview that the California ruling will undoubtedly jump-start the needed "momentum toward treating same-sex couples fairly across the country." The court's embrace of the term "marriage" is itself critical, Palmquist said, because "it is a concept understood by everyone," unlike domestic partnerships and civil unions.

In San Francisco the city attorney, Dennis Herrera, said the ruling will ensure not only that same-sex couples in California receive equal treatment under the law, but also that the impact will be nationwide. Palmquist worries that it may take "another 20 years in North Carolina."

"Unfortunately, the most immediate impact will be to energize the right-wing base around this issue and to deny us equal protection," he added.

Indeed, as soon as the ruling became public, posters on Rush Limbaugh's Web site went ballistic, with more than 500 posts in 18 hours, many like this one: "Well, now sodomy can be sanctioned with a marriage license. What's next -- marrying your dog???"

In Raleigh, just one day into the 2008 legislative session, state Sen. Jim Forrester, R-Gaston, filed an anti-gay marriage state constitutional amendment, and a similar bill is expected to be introduced into the state House. This is the fourth consecutive session such an amendment has been filed in Raleigh.

But the times, they are a-changin'. Two states now allow same-sex couples to legally tie the knot. Five other states provide gay and lesbian couples the option of forming domestic partnerships or civil unions. And three other states, as well as Washington, D.C., provide lesbians and gays some of the basic benefits and protections of married opposite-sex couples. That's 10 and counting.

And while my partner and I cannot marry here (now), I look at our "wedding bands" and imagine the time when we will have the opportunity here at home. Certainly, that day is one giant step closer than it was before the California Supreme Court stood up to ignorance and in favor of fairness.

(Steven Petrow is the past president of the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association. He lives in Chapel Hill.)