by Dan Savage
on Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 11:37 AM
The state legislature in Nevada this weekend overrode twice-and-soon-thrice divorced Governor Jim Gibbons' veto of a domestic partnership bill. This aspect of the Nevada's DP bill must have been drafted to ease the fears of those Nevadans terrified by the prospect of gay wedding ceremonies:
The measure states, among other things, that no "solemnization ceremony" is required and it's "left to the dictates and conscience of partners entering into a domestic partnership" whether to have such a ceremony.
Yeah, we wouldn't the gays screwing up the solemnity of marriage as observed in the state of Nevada, home of the drive-by wedding chapel. And... is that a dictate in your pocket or are you just glad to be solemnizing me?
Opponents of gay marriage oppose the new version of the bill, of course, just as they opposed the previous version and would oppose any and all possible versions of a marriage equality bill. Their current objection: State anti-discrimination statutes might compel anti-gay florists to sell wedding bouquets to fags and dykes planning their legal gay weddings, weddings that rabidly anti-gay florists might object to on religious grounds. But it's hard to see this bill doing any additional harm to New Hampshire's anti-gay florist community: the law in New Hampshire already bars discrimination based on sexual orientation—against gay or straight people—in credit, public accommodation, services, etc.
Which means that the state's anti-gay-florists have long been compelled to sell wedding bouquets to gay and lesbian couples whose consciences dictated that they hold "solemnization ceremonies"—or commitment ceremonies—prior to the legalization of same-sex marriage in New Hampshire.
If the plight of anti-gay florists is the best objection opponents of marriage equality have got... we're really winning.