In addition to obsessing about the Mormon church's obsession with us, and while preparing to take part in a national day of protest tomorrow, we shouldn't lose focus on pressing for the rights of same-sex couples here in Washington State.

Christine Gregoire, like Barack Obama, offers only cautious, wishy-washy support for full marriage equality. She says she's for domestic partnerships and civil unions, but not for marriage equality—and, like Obama, she says it with a pained grimace, practically blinking out "this is what I have to say if I want to win elections!" in Morse code.

While Gregoire hasn't fought for full civil marriage rights for same sex couples, she did, in her first term, sign two domestic partnership bills that landed on her desk. State sen. Ed Murray and state rep. Jamie Pedersen got those bills to Gregoire's desk, part of their strategy to give marriage rights for same-sex couples a chunk of time in the wake of the state supreme court's appalling bigoted ruling on gay marriage. And during her reelection campaign Gregoire said she would oppose any attempts to pass a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in Washington State if it ever became legal here… and I'm not sure how that would happen, since the our state's top court ruled against us and the governor refused to answer a direct question about whether she would sign a bill legalizing same-sex marriage if it landed on her desk.

Nevertheless: If voters were going to punish Gregoire and the Dems in the legislature for granting marriagelike rights to same-sex couples, this was the election to do it. But domestic-partner-law-signin', hypothetical-anti-gay-marriage-amendment-opposin' Christine Gregoire beat gay-marriage-opposing, slick-as-shit bigot Dino Rossi by much-wider-than-expected margins. Dem majorities in the legislature held steady. So it would appear that no political price was paid, arguably, for Gregoire signing those two DP bills, or for the Dem legislature's support for the rights of same-sex couples to equal treatment. Not just that, it would appear that voters have signed off on equal treatment for same-sex couples.

So… what can we expect this session? With Gregoire's mandate—let's all start calling it that, shall we?—we have a right to expect, and we should demand, less timidity from the governor and bolder, more aggressive moves on marriage equality from our state legislature.

"Most of the gay legislators are getting together a week from Saturday to talk about what to do next session and beyond to get our state to marriage equality," state rep. Jamie Pedersen writes in an e-mail. Until that meeting, Pedersen can't say for sure what the plan will be for advancing the rights of same-sex couples in the upcoming legislative session. He adds that he hasn't spoken with the leadership yet, or with the governor. But he was willing to say this:

"In 2009, I think we should pursue another expansion of domestic partnership, adding at least the same benefits that spouses of state employees get (pensions, death benefits for spouses of police killed in the line of duty), parentage rights (for example, a presumption that a child born to one registered domestic partner is the child of the other partner as well), and estate taxes (providing an exemption from estate taxes on the death of one partner when the property is passing to the other)."

Pedersen says they may amend the 300 or so other statutes that treat spouses and DPs differently under state law—"We may decide to add 'everything but marriage'"—or they might wait to do that until 2010.

Pedersen also plans to introduce a bill in the 2009 session that would help gay and lesbian couples who are planning to have kids.

"Right now, it's illegal to pay a surrogate in Washington—and even if you can find a surrogate to help you carry a child, she has a 48-hour period after the birth to consider whether she wants to give up your baby," Pedersen writes. "If she decides to keep it, you can be left paying child support until the child turns 18. By contrast, in California the intended parents can go to court while the surrogate is pregnant and get a 'determination of parentage,' which means that as soon as the child is born, it is theirs. No need for an adoption, no uncertainty."

What about going for broke and legalizing full marriage equality in Washington state?

"We will keep a close eye on what happens in NJ and NY this session," writes Pedersen, "the oral arguments and decision in Lambda Legal's Iowa case, any progress in Congress, and the results of the legal challenge to Prop 8. We'll have a marriage bill (at least in the House)—but post-California we recognize that we have a lot more work to do on public education and preparing for a successful defense against a referendum challenge before we can ask our colleagues to pass the bill."