MYTH: The strength of marriage lies in its
simple, universal, unchangeable definition. Any
attempt to modify this age-old institution would
clearly weaken, and possibly destroy it.

FACT: What keeps marriage a viable institution
is its ability to evolve with changing times. Had it
remained the ultra-sexist, exploitive institution of
our early days, it would have been discarded long
ago by a society that now strives toward equality,
dignity, and respect for all people.


         PART TWO : 2000 - 2013


meant "the two became one", and the "one" was the
husband. A wife was a "femme coverte" (a woman
whose rights and legal existence were "covered" by
her husband.) As Blackstone said in Commentaries on
the Laws of England, "By marriage the husband and
wife are one person in law; that is, the very being
or legal existence of the woman is suspended during
the marriage, or at least incorporated and
consolidated into that of the husband, under whose
wing, protection and cover, she performs everything."
Though single women often had some of the same
rights as men, a bride underwent a "civil death" as
she gave up all rights of person and property. Her
clothing, household goods, dowry, inheritance, wages,
and children belonged to a husband whose "right" to
engage in physical abuse and spousal rape was legally
sanctioned. Outside the home, wives could not
testify or sue in court, make a will, sign a contract,
or have businesses. Divorce was rare - impossible
in some places - and was most often economically
and socially devastating for the woman.
(B-4: 244-248) (B-3: 26) (B-1: 2)

1836: Ernestine Rose began a one-woman
campaign for a Married Women's Property Act by
gathering five hard-won signatures on a petition to
the New York legislature. (B-2: 118) (B-1: 2)

1843: Elizabeth Cady Stanton began lobbying
for the Married Women's Property Act. (B-1: 59)

1843: Informal "common law" marriages became
frequent enough in the 19th century (especially on
the "frontier") that in this year Indiana enacted a law
declaring that for marriage "no particular form of
ceremony shall be necessary, except that the parties
shall declare..... that they take each other as husband
and wife." In many places, if you acted as if you were
married (or cohabitated for awhile) you were married.
Common-law marriages outraged Victorians, who got
such laws taken off the books. Today, only 13 states
recognize them. (B-11: 204-5, 103-4)

1844: NY legislative committee said allowing
wives to control their own property would lead "to
infidelity in the marriage bed, a high rate of divorce,
and increased female criminality." (B-11: 30)

1848: NY finally passed the first of several
Married Women's Property Acts. Other states would
follow in the next few decades. This one gave wives
control of property brought into the marriage, or
acquired afterwards, and exempted it from liability
for the husband's debts. But husbands still had total
control over a wife's wages, and got automatic
custody of all children in divorce. (B-2: 118)
(B-1: 83)

1854: Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady
Stanton organized 60 women to flood NY legislature
with 6,000 petition signatures asking that husbands
lose the right to seize a wife's wages, and for
mothers to have custody of children after divorce.
They fail, but persist. (B-1: 99) (B-2: 118)

1859: Elizabeth Cady Stanton takes up the cause
of divorce reform, and as the only prominent woman
in America who openly spoke out on this issue, she
was severely criticized for it. (B-1: 128)

1860: New York finally granted property rights,
the right to her earnings, the right to sue, and joint
guardianship of children to married women. (B-2: 120)
(B-4: 152) (B-12: 33) (B-1: 131)

1862: With the women's movement inactive for
the duration of the Civil War, New York revoked a
wife's right to joint custody of her children, and
certain widow's benefits, even as women were
becoming widowed in large numbers. {Lesson:
NEVER take anything for granted, and ALWAYS be
vigilant}. (B-1: 149)

1883: U.S. Supreme Court upheld Alabama's
ban on interracial marriages. (B-7: 637)

1887-1906: Contrary to conservative myths
about ex-wives in pre-feminist days getting lavish
and permanent alimony payments, only 9.3% of turn-
of-the-century divorces actually provided for any
permanent alimony. (B-13: 13)

1912: South Carolina still had no divorce law,
and one judge bragged that "a divorce has not been
granted since the Revolution." (B-10: 222)

1948: California law prohibiting interracial
marriages overturned by State supreme court.
(LAT 6/13/1967 p. 1 col 5; "Ban on Interracial
Marriages Struck Down by 9-0 Decision". The body
of the article relates to a later case.)

1940's & 50's: The devastation of the
depression and Second World War encouraged a
grasping for "emotional security." Influential
sociologists like Talcott Parsons exploited this need
by encouraging a "solution": Marriage is which man's
"instrumental" role was to earn a living, and woman's
"expressive" role was to provide full-time emotional
support for husband and family. Popular magazines,
radio and TV shows reinforced the message. (B-3: 336)

1951: California granted a wife the right to
manage and control community property earned by
her, but as "head of the household," the husband
still controlled most other property. (B-4: 153)

1953: Nebraska supreme court ruled in Mc Guire
vs. Mc Guire that though a husband is required to
"support" his wife, simply letting her live in the
house meets this definition. "The living standards of
a family are a matter of concern to the household,
and not for the courts to determine, even though the
husband's attitude toward his wife, according to his
wealth and circumstances, leaves little to be said in
his behalf. As long as the home is maintained and the
parties are living as husband and wife it may be said
that the husband is legally supporting his wife and
the purpose of the marriage relation is being carried
out." { Mc Guire v. Mc Guire 157 Neb. 226, 59 N.W. 2d
336 (Neb. Sup. Ct. 1953) } (B-13: 11) (B-12: 31)

1967: Bans on interracial marriage in Virginia
and 15 other states struck down by U.S. Supreme
Court. Forty one states had these laws at one time.
Polls showed that 72% of Americans still opposed
interracial marriages, and 48% thought such unions
should be a crime. (NYT 6/13/1967 p. 1 col 2;
"Justices Upset All Bans on Interracial Marriage")
(NYT 9/13/99 p. 18 col 4; "Miscegenation Laws")
(B-8: 1928, 2168)

1967: New York finally added "cruel treatment"
and four other grounds for divorce to a law which
since 1787 had allowed divorce only for adultery.
(NYT 9/1/1967 p. 1 col 6; "New Divorce Law Becomes
Effective In the State Today")

1969: California Governor Reagan signs the first
"no fault" divorce bill. It replaced the old "adversary"
system in which one party had to prove the other
guilty of a specific type of misconduct with a system
in which one partner could unilaterally divorce the
other by claiming "irreconcilable differences". While
this facilitated a mutually desired divorce, the fact
that mutual consent was not required deprived an
economically vulnerable spouse of any "bargaining
power" in regard to a settlement. (LAT 9/6/1969
p. 1 col 3; "Divorce Reform Bill Signed by Reagan")
(B-9: 20)

1970: Jack Baker & Mike Mc Connell begin drive
for legal recognition of same-sex marriage. (NYT
8/7/1996 p. 17 col 2; "Jack and Bob, Going to the

1975: California wives gain equal control over
ALL community property, thus recognizing marriage
as a true partnership - precisely the opposite of its
"traditional" definition. (B-4: 154)

1978: Though upheld by the Louisiana supreme
court, a law designating the husband "head and
master" of the household was finally repealed by
the state legislature. (B-6: 82-83)

1980: 47 states barred a woman from charging
her husband with rape. (B-13: 10)

1985: 23 states considered marital rape a
crime. (B-6: 114)

1986: Congress revised federal rape laws, and
ended the marital exemption. (B-6: 120)

1993: Spousal rape illegal in all 50 states. (W-1)

May 5, 1993: Hawaii supreme court said ban
on same-sex marriage violated the "equal protection"
guarantee of the state constitution, and put the
burden of proof on the state to "justify" this
practice when they sent the case to a lower court
for argument. Realizing that absolutely no truly
rational basis for such bias existed, conservatives
launched a "pre-emptive strike" by campaigning to
have all states pass laws refusing to recognize
gay or lesbian marriages authorized in other states.
As of February, 2000, 30 states had passed such laws.
(NYT 5/7/1993; 14 col. 5; "In Hawaii, Step Toward
Legalized Gay Marriage")

Sep 10, 1996: Congress passed the misnamed
"Defense of Marriage Act." It did nothing to make
marriage stronger, more equal, or harder to enter
into or get out of. It just defined it in heterosexist
terms, and purported to give states the right to
ignore the "full faith and credit" clause of the
Constitution by letting them refuse to recognize
gay or lesbian marriages performed in other states.
(NYT 9/11/96 p. 1 col 6; "Senators Reject Both Job-
Bias Ban and Gay Marriage")

Dec 3, 1996: Hawaii Circuit Judge Kevin Chang
rules against state's ban on same-sex marriages. (LAT
12/4/1996, p. 1 col. 5; "Hawaii Ruling Lifts Ban on
Marriage of Same-Sex Couples"). Hawaii's supreme
court was widely expected to uphold this decision,
but a referendum amending Hawaii's constitution to
prohibit same-sex marriages passed, thus forcing
the court to declare in 1999 that only heterosexual
unions are valid.

Jun 9, 1998: Southern Baptists declared that
a husband had the responsibility to "lead" his family,
and that a wife should "submit graciously" to the
leadership of her husband, and serve as his "helper."
Though this doctrine would have been considered a
"mainstream view" when the women's movement
began in 1848, it was almost universally criticized
and widely ridiculed 150 years later, so our work has
had results. (NYT, June 10, 1998, p 1, col 1; "Southern
Baptists Declare Wife Should 'Submit' to Her

Jan 16, 1999: 95 United Methodist ministers
defy their church by uniting Jeanne Barnett and Ellie
Charlton in a Holy Union in Sacramento (CA). (LAT
1/17/99 page 11 col 1; "95 Ministers Risk Jobs,
Bless 'Holy Union' of Lesbian Couple") On February 11,
2000 the Methodist Church declined to prosecute.
(LAT 2/12/2000 p. 15 col 1; "Methodist Panel
Dismisses Complaint on Rite for Gays")

Dec 20, 1999: Vermont supreme court ruled that
it is unconstitutional to deny benefits of marriage to
same-sex couples. Legislature must either recognize
gay and lesbian marriages or create a parallel
"domestic partner" system. (LAT 12/21/1999, p.
1 col 6; "Vt. Court Backs Equal Rights for Gay

Jan 10, 2000: Support for gay marriage
reached 15% and lesbian marriage 16% (up from
10% in 1996) with a quarter having no strong
feelings on the issue, and 57% opposed to gay,
and 55% to lesbian marriage. So, presently there
is less opposition to same-sex marriage than
there was to interracial marriage in the 60's.
(Reuters, 2/8/2000; "Most in U.S. Favor Laws
Barring Gay Discrimination")


As we entered a new century, marriage continued
to evolve toward a more equal, realistic, and inclusive
definition. Feminists continued to be a vital part
of that process.


LAT = Los Angeles Times NYT = New York Times

B-1: "Women's Suffrage In America" by Elizabeth
Frost & Kathryn Cullen-Du Pont

B-2: "A History of Women In America" by Carol
Hymowitz & Michaele Weissman

B-3: "Womanhood In America From Colonial
Times To The Present" by Mary P. Ryan

B-4: "The Women's Movement" by Barbara

B-5: "The Woman Question In American History"
by Barbara Welter

B-6: "Feminist Chronicles, 1953 - 1993" by
Toni Carabillo, Judith Meuli, and June Bundy Csida

B-7: "Supreme Court Reporter, Vol 1, October
Term 1882." Case is "Pace vs. Alabama", (106 U.S. 583)

B-8: "The Gallup Poll" Volume 3, 1959-1971

B-9: "The Divorce Revolution" by Lenore Weitzman

B-10: "A History of Divorce" by S.B. Kitchin

B-11: "What Is Marriage For?" by E.J. Graff

B-12: "Rights and Wrongs" by Susan Cary Nicholas,
Alice M. Price, and Rachel Rubin.

B-13: "The Equal Rights Amendment" United
Commission on Civil Rights Clearinghouse
Publication #68.

W-1: National Clearinghouse on Marital and
Date Rape / Women's History Library website.



                    PART TWO : 2000-2013


March 7, 2000 : California voters approved Prop-

osition 22 by a margin of 61% to 39%. Though a

statewide balIot initiative, it was not a Consti-

tutional Amendment, and simply added Section

308.5 to the Family Code, stating that : “Only

marriage between a man and a woman is valid

or recognized in California.” This gave oppo-

nents the opportunity to argue that it was

inconsistent with the California Constitution,

and therefore invalid.


March 29, 2000 : The Central Conference of

American Rabbis declared that gay relation-

ships are “worthy of affirmation” and that

Reform rabbis who officiated at such cere-

monies would have the support of their group,

which represented about 1,800 rabbis, whose

congregations totaled nearly 1.5 million



April 25, 2000 : Vermont’s legislature gave

final approval to a “civil union” bill that gave

virtually all the rights and responsibilities to

same-sex couples as the state gave to married

couples. The Governor signed the bill the next

day. It took effect on July 1, 2000.


May 25, 2000 : The Presbyterian Church U.S.A.’s

highest court upheld the right of its ministers

to conduct “holy union” ceremonies for same-

sex couples, as long as they are not considered



April 11, 2001 : “Gay and Lesbian Advocates

and Defenders” sued the Massachusetts

Department of Public Health on behalf of

seven same-sex couples denied marriage

licenses in March and April, 2001. A

Superior Court judge ruled against them on

May 7, 2002, so they appealed to the state’s

Supreme Judicial Court. (Original case citation :

14 Mass. L. Rep. 591)


June 26, 2003 : The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in

the case of “Lawrence vs. Texas” (539 U.S. 558)

that laws which criminalize homosexual activity

are unconstitutional. 


June 24 – July 8, 2003 : According to the Pew

Research Center, 38% of Americans polled now

backed same-sex marriage (up from 27% in

1996) and 53% were opposed (down from

65%). Those most opposed were Evangelical

Protestants (83%) whose views were essen-

tially unchanged since the 1996 poll.


September 19, 2003 : California Governor Gray

Davis signed AB 205, The Domestic Partner

Rights and Responsibilities Act, providing same-

sex couples with nearly all the same rights as

married couples. 


Nov 18, 2003 : The Massachusetts Supreme

Judicial Court ruled 4-3 in favor of same-sex

marriage : “The question before us is whether,

consistent with the Massachusetts Constitution,

the commonwealth may deny the protections,

benefits and obligations conferred by civil

marriage to two individuals of the same sex

who wish to marry. We conclude that it may

not. The Massachusetts Constitution affirms

the dignity and equality of all individuals. It

forbids the creation of second class citizens.”

The court gave Massachusetts 180 days to

comply with its ruling, which it did on May

17, 2004.  (Goodridge v. Department of Public

Health, 440 Mass. 309) This was the same

case that was originally filed on April 11, 2001.


Dec 10-13, 2003 : A New York Times/CBS Poll

shows that 34% of Americans supported same-

sex marriage, 61% are opposed. But 39%

support civil unions, with 54% opposed. Fifty-

five percent favor a Federal Constitutional

Amendment banning same-sex marriage, while

40 per cent are opposed. Seventy-one percent

who see marriage as a religious issue were

opposed to same-sex marriage, but 55 per cent

of those who saw it as a legal matter were in



February 4, 2004 : The Massachusetts Supreme

Judicial Court advised that civil unions are not

enough to comply with its November 18, 2003

ruling, and only extending the right to marry to

same-sex couples will do.


Feb 12, 2004 : San Francisco began issuing

marriage licenses to same-sex couples at the

request of newly-elected Mayor Gavin Newsom.

Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon were the first couple

to be married. This tactic spread to other cities

across the country. On Feb. 27th, New Paltz,

New York, follows suit, as does Portland, Oregon,

on March 3rd, though courts soon order a halt.


February 18, 2004 : Chicago Mayor Richard M.

Daley said he would have ”no problem” with

Cook County issuing marriage licenses to same-

sex couples.


February 24, 2004 : President Bush announced

his support of a Constitutional Amendment

banning same-sex marriage.


February 27, 2004 :  California Attorney

General Bill Lockyer asked the State Supreme

Court to issue an order invalidating all the

state’s same-sex marriages and halting new

ones. The court refuses, but says it will accept

briefs asking them to do so on March 5th.


March 4, 2004 : New York Mayor Michael R.

Bloomberg said he favors same-sex unions.


Mar 11, 2004 : The California Supreme Court

ordered San Francisco to stop allowing same-

sex marriages until the issue of their legality

could be resolved. The next day, “Equality

California” filed a lawsuit challenging the

constitutionality of California’s marriage



April 7, 2004 : Thirteen same-sex couples sued

the State of New York arguing that its current

definition of marriage violated the State Con-

stitution’s guarantees of equal protection,

privacy and due process.


May 17, 2004 : Massachusetts began issuing

marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Marcia

Kadish and Tanya McCloskey became the first

to be legally married there, and the first in the

U.S. whose same-sex marriage was unquestion-

ably legal.


May 25, 2004 : The California Supreme Court

held hearings on the legality of the same-sex

marriages performed in San Francisco.


July 10, 2004 : New Jersey same-sex couples

began signing up for domestic partnerships.

The Domestic Partnership Act, P.L. 2003, was

passed on January 12, 2004.


July 14, 2004 : A Constitutional Amendment to

ban same-sex marriage nationally fell 12 votes

short of the 60 needed to move it to the Senate

floor, and 19 short of the 67 that would have

been needed for passage by the required 2/3

majority. On September 30th, the vote in the

House was 227 to 186, or 49 short of the 2/3

needed there.


August 12, 2004 : The California Supreme Court

ruled that San Francisco City and County did not

have the authority to issue marriage licenses to

same-sex couples, and voided all such marriages

performed there.


November 2, 2004 : Eleven states passed

Constitutional Amendments banning same-sex

marriage (Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky,

Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota,

Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon and Utah.)


November 29, 2004 : The U.S. Supreme Court

turned down the Massachusetts case, leaving the

state’s same-sex marriage law intact.


February 4, 2005 : New York State Justice Doris

Ling-Cohan ruled that New York’s Domestic

Relations Law of 1909, which limits marriage to

opposite-sex couples, deprived same-sex couples

of equal protection and due process rights that

are guaranteed by the State Constitution. But on

July 6th, the New York State Court of Appeals

ruled against same-sex marriage


March 14, 2005 : A California judge ruled that

Proposition 22 was unconstitutional.


May 12, 2005 : A Federal judge struck down

Nebraska’s ban on same-sex marriage.


July 4, 2005 : The United Church of Christ backed

same-sex marriage.


September 6, 2005 : The California Legislature

became the first to pass a bill legalizing same-

sex marriage without being forced to do so by

a court. But Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger

vetoed the bill on September 29th.


October 25, 2006 : The New Jersey Supreme

Court unanimously ruled in “Lewis vs. Harris”

(188 N.J. 415 ; 908 A. 2d 196) that same-sex

couples were entitled to the same protections

as heterosexual couples. On December 13th,

the New Jersey Legislature passes a “civil

union” bill to comply.


Nov 7, 2006 : Voters in seven states (Idaho,

Colorado, South Dakota, South Carolina,

Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin) approved

referenda banning same-sex marriage.


February 19, 2007 : New Jersey’s “Civil Union

Act” took effect.


May 15, 2008 : The California Supreme Court

voted 4-3 to invalidate Proposition 22, declar-

ing that same-sex couples have a right to

marry, and that domestic partnerships are

not equal to marriage.


October 10, 2008 : The Connecticut Supreme

Court ruled 4-3 that same-sex couples have a

right to marry and that “civil union” statutes

are not the equivalent of marriage and violate

the state’s “equal protection” guarantees.


November 4, 2008 : California voters passed

Proposition 8 by 52-48%, once again banning

same-sex marriage, and putting in doubt the

validity of the 18,000 such marriages performed

between the time Proposition 22 was struck

down and Proposition 8 was passed.  Florida and

Arizona also approved bans.


April 3, 2009 : The Iowa Supreme Court ruled

unanimously that a state law limiting marriage

to a man and a woman was unconstitutional.

They mentioned nothing about a residency

requirement, so couples from any state could

go there to be married.


April 7, 2009 : Vermont became the first state to

successfully legalize same-sex marriage by a vote

of the legislature. The vote in the House was 100

to 49, and 23-5 in the Senate, in both cases

enough to override the Governor’s veto.


May 6, 2009 : Maine’s governor signed a bill

making that state the fifth to legalize same-sex



May 26, 2009 : The California Supreme Court

upheld Proposition 8, but ruled that marriages

performed between the time it declared Prop

22 unconstitutional and the November 8th

election to be valid. It also reaffirmed a portion

of its May 15, 2008 ruling in which the Court

said that laws based on sexual orientation

would receive the same degree of scrutiny as

those that discriminated on the basis of sex or



June 3, 2009 : New Hampshire became the sixth

state to legalize same-sex marriage, when Gov.

John Lynch signed a bill passed by the



November 3, 2009 : Maine’s voters repealed the

state’s same-sex marriage law. 


August 4, 2010 : U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn

Walker overturns Proposition 8. Included in his

ruling were 80 ”findings of fact,” which are sig-

nificant because higher courts usually give them

great weight.


August 16, 2010 : The Ninth Circuit Court of

Appeals granted a stay of Walker’s ruling in

regard to California’s Proposition 8.


February 23, 2011 : President Barack Obama

tells the Justice Department to stop defending

the “Defense of Marriage Act.”


May 5-8, 2011 : For the first time, a Gallup Poll

showed a majority of Americans (53%) favored

same-sex marriage, with 45% opposed, and the

rest undecided. In 1996, 2/3 were opposed, with

only 27% in favor. By 2004 support had gone up

to 42%, but stayed relatively steady, reaching

44% in 2010.  


June 24, 2011 : Governor Andrew Cuomo signs

a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in New York.           


July 19, 2011 : President Obama announced his

support for the Respect for Marriage Act, which

would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.


February 7, 2012 : A three-judge panel of the

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rules against

California’s Proposition 8.


February 13, 2012 : Governor Christine

Gregoire signs a bill making same-sex marriage

legal in the State of Washington, though the law

still had to face a voter referendum in November.


March 1, 2012 : Governor Martin O’Malley signed

a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Maryland

as of January 2013. But as in Washington, a

referendum on the law was scheduled for



May 9, 2012 : President Barack Obama endorsed

same-sex marriage.


May 19, 2012 : The N.A.A.C.P.’s Board of

Directors endorsed same-sex marriage.


July 31, 2012 : Proposition 8 supporters

appealed to the Supreme Court.


November 6, 2012 : Maine, Maryland and

Washington voters approved same-sex marriage

in ballot referenda, while voters in Minnesota

reject a referendum which would define

marriage as only between a man and a woman.


December 7, 2012 : The U.S Supreme Court

agreed to hear California’s Proposition 8 case.


February 22, 2013 : The Obama Administration

asked the Supreme Court to overturn the

Defense of Marriage Act :


"The law denies to tens of thousands of same-sex

couples who are legally married under state law

an array of important federal benefits that are

available to legally married opposite-sex couples.

Because this discrimination cannot be justified as

substantially furthering any important govern-

mental interest, Section 3 is unconstitutional."



June 26, 2013 : By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme

Court invalidated the Defense of Marriage Act

in the case of  United States v. Windsor (Case #

12-307.) According to the majority : “The federal

statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose

overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage

and injure those whom the state, by its marriage

laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity.

By seeking to displace this protection and treating

those persons as living in marriages less respected

than others, the federal statute is in violation of the

Fifth Amendment.”


June 26, 2013 : The Supreme Court rules 5-4 in

Hollingsworth v. Perry (Case #12-144) that the

decision of the initial trial judge in District Court,

who overturned California’s Proposition 8

should stand, because those who appealed the

decision had no standing to do so. According to

Justice Roberts, writing for the majority :


“For there to be such a case or controversy, it is

not enough that the party invoking the power of

the court have a keen interest in the issue. That

party must also have “standing,” which requires,

among other things, that it have suffered a concrete

and particularized injury. Because we find that

petitioners do not have standing, we have no

authority to decide this case on its merits, and

neither did the Ninth Circuit …..


“We have never before upheld the standing of a

private party to defend the constitutionality of a

state statute when state officials have chosen not

to. We decline to do so for the first time here.”


June 28, 2013 : The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

lifted the stay it imposed when its decision was

appealed to the Supreme Court. California began

issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples again.


June 30, 2013 : Justice Anthony Kennedy denied

without comment a request to halt the issuance

of marriage licenses in California to same-sex




                                 SOURCES :


03/07/2000 : “March 2000 Primary Statement

of Vote.” League of Women Voters, “Smart Voter”



03/29/2000 : New York Times, March 30,

2000, “Reform Rabbis Back Blessing of Gay

Unions,” by Gustav Niebuhr.


04/25/2000 : NYT, April 26, 2000, “Vermont

Gives Final Approval to Same-Sex Unions,” by

Carey Goldberg.


05/25/2000 : NYT, May 25, 2000, “Presbyterian

Court Upholds Holy Unions for Same-Sex

Couples,” by Laurie Goodstein.


06/24/2003 : NYT, July 25, 2003, “Opposition to

Gay Marriage Is Declining, Study Finds,” by Robin



09/19/2003 : NYT, September20, 2003, “Cali-

fornia : New Domestic Partner Rights.”


12/10/2003 : NYT, December 21, 2003, “Strong

Support Is Found For Ban On Gay Marriage,” by

Katharine Q. Seelye.


02/04/2004 : NYT, February 5, 2004, “Massachu-

setts Gives New Push to Gay Marriage,” by Katie



02/12/2004 : NYT, February 13, 2004, “Dozens of

Gay Couples Marry in San Francisco Ceremonies.”


02/18/2004 : NYT, Feb 20, 2004, “Daley Backs

Marriage for Gays in Chicago.”


02/24/2004 : NYT, February 25, 2004 , “Same

Sex Marriage : Bush’s Remarks on Marriage



02/27/2004 : NYT, February 28, 2004, “
State Official Asks Court to Bar Licenses.”


03/04/2004 : NYT, March 6, 2004, “Bloomberg Is

Said to Want State to Legalize Same-Sex Marriages.


03/11/2004 : NYT, March 12, 2004, “San Fran-

cisco Forced to Halt Gay Marriages.”


04/07/2004 : NYT, April 8, 2004, “In a Lawsuit,

Same-Sex Couples Say New York State Ruined

Their Wedding Plans.”


05/17/2004 : Washington Post, May 18, 2004,

“Gay Couples Wed In Mass.”


05/25/2004 : NYT, May 26, 2004, “California

Supreme Court Considers Gay Marriage

Licenses,” by Katie Zezima.


07/11/2004 : NYT, July 11, 2004, “Gays Sign Up

for Domestic Partnership Status.”


07/15/2004 : NYT, July 16, 2004, “Senators Block

Initiative to Ban Same-Sex Unions.”


08/12/2004 : NYT, August 13, 2004, “California

Court Rules Gay Unions Have No Standing,” by

Dean Murphy.


11/02/2004 : Washington Post, Nov. 4, 2004,

 “Same-Sex Bans Fuel Conservative Agenda.”


11/29/2004 : NYT, November 30, 2004, “Supreme

Court Turns Down a Same-Sex Marriage Case,” by

David D. Kirkpatrick & Katie Zezima.


02/04/2005 : NYT, Feb. 5, 2005, “Judge’s Ruling

Opens Way for Gay Marriage in New York City.”


03/14/2005 : NYT, March 15, 2005, “Judge in

California Voids Ban on Same-Sex Marriage,” by

Dean E. Murphy.


05/12/2005 : NYT, May 13, 2005, “Judge Voids

Same-Sex Marriage Ban in Nebraska.”


07/04/2005 : NYT, July 5, 2005, “United Church of

Christ Backs Same-Sex Marriage.”


09/06/2005 : NYT, September 7, 2005, “Same Sex

Marriage Wins Vote In California.”


10/25/2006 : NYT, October 26, 2006, “Ruling on

Same-Sex Marriage : New Jersey Court Backs

Full Rights for Gay Couples,” by David W. Chen


11/07/2006 : NYT, November 8, 2006, “The 2006

Elections : Ballot Measures,“ by Shaila Dewan.


02/19/2007 : NYT, February 20, 2007, “Eager-

ness and Some Resignation As Civil Union Law

Takes Effect,” by Ellen Barry.


05/15/2008 : NYT, May 16, 2008, “California

Court Overturns a Ban on Gay Marriage.”


10/10/2008 : NYT, October 11, 2008, “Gay

Marriage Is Ruled Legal In Connecticut,” by

Robert D. McFadden.


11/04/2008 : NYT, November 6, 2008, “Bans

in Three States on Gay Marriage,” by Jesse

McKinley and Laurie Goodstein.


04/03/2009 : NYT, April 4, 2009, “Gay Couples

In Iowa Win Right to Wed,” by Monica Davey.


04/07/2009 : NYT, April 8, 2009, “Rejecting

Veto, Vermont Backs Gay Marriage,” by

Abby Goodnough.


05/06/2009 : NYT, May 7, 2009, “Maine

Governor Signs Same-Sex Marriage Bill

as Opponents Plan a ‘Veto,’ “ by Abby



05/26/2009 : NYT, May 27, 2009, “Ruling

Upholds California’s Ban on Gay Marriage,”

by John Schwartz.


06/03/2009 : NYT, June 4, 2009, “New

Hampshire Approves Same-Sex Marriage,”

by Abby Goodnough


11/03/2009 : NYT, November 5, 2009,

“A Setback In Maine for Gay Marriage, But

Medical Marijuana Law Expands,” by

Abby Goodnough.


08/04/2010 : NYT, August 5, 2010, “Cali-

fornia’s Ban on Gay Marriage Is Struck

Down,” by Jesse McKinley and John



08/16/2010 : NYT, August 17, 2010, “Appeals

Court Extends Stay on Allowing Gay Marriage,”

by Jesse McKinley.


02/23/2011 : NYT, February 24, 2011, “In

Turnabout, U.S. Says Marriage Act Blocks Gay

Rights,” by Charlie Savage and Sheryl Gay



05/05-08/2011 : Gallup Politics, May 20, 2011.


06/24/2011 : NYT, June 25, 2011, “New York

Allows Same-Sex Marriage, Becoming Largest

State To Pass Law,” By Nicholas Confessore &

Michael Barbaro.


07/19/2011 : “President Obama Endorses the

Respect for Marriage Act” (“Freedom To Marry”

Press Release by Katie Garcia, July 19, 2011.)


02/07/2012 : NYT, February 8, 2012, “Cali-

fornia Ban on Gay Unions Is Struck Down,”

by Adam Nagourney.


02/13/2012 : NYT, February 14, 2012,

“Washington: Gay Marriage Legalized” by



03/01/2012 : NYT, March 2, 2012,

“Maryland : Same-Sex Marriage Signed

Into Law,” by Reuters.


05/09/2012 : NYT, May 10, 2012, “Obama

Supports Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage,”

by Daniel E. Slotkin.


05/19/2012 : NYT, May 20, 2012, “In Largely

Symbolic Move, N.A.A.C.P. Votes to Endorse

Same-Sex Marriage,” by Michael Barbaro.


07/31/2012 : Los Angeles Times blog, 11:31

a.m., July 31, 2012, “Foes of gay marriage appeal

Prop. 8 ruling to U.S. Supreme Court.”


11/06/2012 : NYT, November 8, 2012,

Editorial : ”A Big Leap For Marriage Equality.”


12/07/2012 : NYT, December 8, 2012 : “Supreme

Court Takes Up Same-Sex Marriage for First Time,”

by The Associated Press.


06/26/2013 : NYT, June 26, 2013 : “Supreme

Court Bolsters Gay Marriage With Two Major



06/28/2013 : NYT, June 28, 2013 : “Gay Couples

Who Sued in California Are Married.”


06/30/2013 : NYT, June 30, 2013 :“Justice Denies

Request to Halt Gay Marriages”