A lot of people have already posted about today's California High Ruling that stated that it was unconstitutional to ban same sex marriages in that state. In effect, that means there are now two states that are providing full marriage rights to same sex couples in America.

Since other people are providing more information about the details relating to the ruling, I figured I would talk a little bit about what I think this means.

Obviously, I am just plain thrilled about this. That is probably obvious. The thing is that I am not sure that it is going to make a major difference. California is a big state, but it is also viewed as one of the most liberal in the country ... sorta like Massachusetts. Once again the change is being brought about through a very close ruling (4 to 3) by a court, and I can already her opponents using their usual argument about reactionary courts making law rather than ruling on it. (I wish more people would point out great cases like Brown vs. the Board of Education of Topeka, Kanses when someone says that!)

It is a shame that the legislature of California had been able to bring this about. Granted, that was due to a lack of trying and failing. That would have made a greater statement while also also cutting back that argument.

This is an important step though. As with many other issues like the death penalty, the Supreme Court is more likely to have similar opinion as more and more states due this since it will reflect a changing national view about same-sex marriage. We are a long way away from that at this time, though.

I do wonder about Novemeber, though. With the ruling of the Superior Court in Massachusetts in 2004, we saw a conservative crusade across the country against it. It was part of the reason why Bush won reelection and why so many states instituted constitutional changes to ban same-sex marrige.

On a bright note, we do see Arnold Schwarzenegger stepping forward and saying that he would oppose any attempt to change the California constitution in such away. That is a big step for a Republican, even though he leans to the more liberal side of the party.

This still leaves open the possibility that RI would become the first state to legalize same-sex marriage via legislative means. The good news is that such legislation (as well as the exact opposite) has been submitted every year since I was in college. Granted, it gets trapped in the Judicial Committee, but it seems like support in our General Assembly seems to grow a bit more each year. So, I will just keep crossing my fingers and letting my voice be heard.

I can't help but wonder what will happen after the next election (2010) when we will get a new governor. That might lead to a big change in the landscape, particularly since there is talk about the mayor of Providence, who is gay, being one of the leading contenders as the replacement.