Judging by the Courant’s news sections, you would never guess that Connecticut may be on the verge of a court-ordered radical re-definition of marriage. For months now the paper has made no mention of the Kerrigan case. And, of course, it ignored FIC’s Rally for Liberty, which brought 300 people to the state Capitol on a Wednesday morning last September to defend marriage and self-government.
But that’s the news sections. The Courant’s Life section has had plenty to say about the Kerrigan case lately–all of it blatantly pro same-sex “marriage.” On Dec. 17th it ran a front page above-the-fold article promoting sales of a T-shirt whose proceeds will go to fund the state’s pro same-sex “marriage” lobbying group. (It even encouraged parents of young children to buy a “onesie” emblazoned with the T-shirt’s pro same-sex “marriage” slogan, “marriage is so gay.”)
Kerrigan and Mock are lead plaintiffs in a landmark marriage-equality case argued in front of the state Supreme Court last May. The woman and other same-sex couples are part of a lawsuit filed in 2004 by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) of Boston, after the couples were denied marriage licenses.
The court has yet to hand down a verdict, which Mock takes as a good sign. If the answer was no, wouldn’t the justices have said so already? Mock thinks the court is simply looking for the right time to say yes.
At issue is whether marriage applies to all citizens, or if it’s an institution reserved strictly for heterosexuals. The state of Connecticut currently offers civil unions — marriage lite — but civil unions don’t go far enough, and separate is never equal. GLAD’s attorney, Bennett H. Klein, says he’s looking forward to the verdict, as are the people at Love Makes a Family, the state’s marriage-equality organization. On verdict day, that group plans a press conference, a rally, and a party — the latter if the decision is the right one.
It’s pretty well known that the SP’s on the Ct. Supreme Ct.-Katz, Palmer, Norcott have put together a majority opinion in favor of gay marriage.
Lawlor and McDonald have been chortiling for months and the gay community has been holding back on civil unions in anticipation…
Expect the decision Friday, Jan. 11.
[Update, posted on Jan. 11th] From a comment I just posted in this thread:
The Supreme Court’s web site lists three decisions scheduled to be released today…and Kerrigan isn’t one of them. The AG just this week submitted the Dec. 7th RI case as supplemental authority to the CT Supremes, which may have pushed back the Kerrigan decision if it was indeed scheduled for today. On the other hand, one would hope the law clerks had already made the Justices aware of the RI ruling. So it may simply be that “in the know” wasn’t.