From John Wilkinson, a member of the Legal Marriage Alliance of Washington's Board of Directors, and formerly the state director of the group, here is an updated LIST O' LINKS TO MARRIAGE SITES. This compilation is entirely John's work, with the assistance of others, as he has noted:

"The majority of these links were lifted verbatim from the excellent Marriage Equality California (MECA) site. Thanks to the many people who sent suggestions for additions, which I've forwarded to L.J. Carusone at MECA. L.J. writes that MECA will be happy to share its links with other groups or have others link directly to the links page at http://marriageequalityca.org/links_marriage.php.

"I've used MECA's order and categorization for ease of comparison between their existing links and suggested additions.

"Please send any additions directly to me at jwilk@eskimo.com. I'll include them in a recurring post of this list."

LIST O' LINKS
(Updated 05/28/02)

INTERNATIONAL

Canada

Equal Marriage for Same-Sex Couples (Canada):
http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/

Free2Marry:
http://www.free2marry.com/ -- Eight same-sex couples' fight for the right to marry in Canada.

The Netherlands

http://ruljis.leidenuniv.nl/user/cwaaldij/www/NHR/news.htm
-- Latest news about same-sex marriage in the Netherlands by Kees Waaldijk (Universiteit Leiden, the Netherlands)

New Zealand

civilunions.org:
http://www.civilunions.org.nz/mainset.htm

Lesbian and Gay Equality (LeGaLE) (New Zealand):
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/nigelchr/index.htm

LEGAL

The American Civil Liberties Union:
http://www.aclu.org/issues/gay/hmgl.html

Gay & Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD):
http://www.glad.org/ -- New England's leading legal rights organization dedicated to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation, HIV status and gender identity and expression.

Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund:
http://www.lambdalegal.org/ -- The nation's oldest and largest legal organization dedicated to the civil rights of lesbians, gay men, and people with HIV/AIDS.

U.S. NATIONAL

Equal In Every State:
http://www.equalstates.org/simon/hisblogger.html -- A national campaign to record the stories of same-sex couples across the U.S. of diverse backgrounds to be used for research, advocacy groups and the media.

Faces of Family:
http://www.ftmf.org/fof/
A Freedom to Marry Foundation project created to provide a public display of support for the institution of marriage for all families.

The Freedom to Marry Collaborative:
http://www.freedomtomarry.org/ -- A non-gay/gay partnership to secure full equality and recognition for same-sex couples and their families.

The Freedom to Marry Foundation:
http://www.ftmf.org/ -- Supporting the right to marriage for all families.

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC):
http://www.hrc.org/issues/marriage/index.asp -- The Human Rights Campaign continues to work with its coalition partners to ensure that same-sex couples have the opportunity to share in the rights and
responsibilities of marriage.

Independent Gay Forum:
http://www.indegayforum.org/library/marriage.html
Conservative LGBT writers weigh in on marriage for same-sex couples.

Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund Marriage Project:
http://www.lambdalegal.org/cgi-bin/iowa/issues/record?record=9 -- Want to Get Married? Get Engaged!

Marriage Equality U.S.A. (MEUSA):
http://www.marriageequality.com/ -- A national organization to secure the freedom and the right of same-sex couples to enter into legally-recognized civil marriage.

National Gay and Lesbian Task Force marriage page:
http://www.ngltf.org/issues/issue.cfm?issueID=10 -- Has DOMA law map.

The National Organization for Women (NOW):
http://www.now.org/issues/lgbi/marr-rep.html

Partners Task Force for Gay & Lesbian Couples:
http://www.buddybuddy.com/toc.html -- A national resource for same-sex couples, containing more than 200 essays, surveys, legal articles, and resources on legal marriage, ceremonies, domestic partner benefits, relationship tips, parenting, and immigration.

POLLS

ReligiousTolerance.org:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marp.htm -- Public opinion polls on same-sex marriages: U.S. and Canada.

Partners Task Force for Gay & Lesbian Couples:
http://www.buddybuddy.com/mar-surv.html -- A Survey of Surveys, 1989 to 2002.

RELIGIOUS

Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry (RCFM):
http://www.rcfm.org/ -- Supports civil marriage rights for same gender couples and seeks to promote
dialogue within faith communities about religious marriage for gay and lesbian couples.

ReligiousTolerance.org:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marr.htm -- Same-sex marriages and civil unions.

Interfaith Working Group: Religious Support for Equal Marriage Rights:
http://www.iwgonline.org/marriage/ -- The Interfaith Working Group's mission is to inform the public of the diversity of religious opinion on social issues where it is not widely recognized by providing a voice and a forum for religious organizations, congregations and clergy who support equal rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people; reproductive freedom; and the separation of church and state.

REPORTS AND STUDIES

Overview of Protections, Benefits & Obligations of Marriage Under Massachusetts and Federal Law
http://www.glad.org/Publications/CivilRightProject/PBOsOfMarriage.pdf -- Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD)

Same-Sex Couples: Marriage, Families, and Children: An Analysis of Proposition 22, The Knight Initiative:
http://lawschool.stanford.edu/faculty/wald/titlepage.shtml -- by Professor Michael Wald, Stanford Law School.

Marriage Laws of the Fifty States, District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/Table_Marriage.htm

Pathfinder Series: Same-Sex Marriage:
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~axellute/ssm.htm -- Rutgers--the State University of New Jersey School of Law, Newark, Justice Henry Ackerson Library, compiled by Paul Axel-Lute.

The RCW Project: An Analysis of the Benefits and Burdens of Marriage Contained in the Revised Code of Washington:
http://www.lmaw.org/rcw_project.htm -- By Jamie D. Pedersen for the Legal Marriage Alliance of Washington [Note: Jamie is also a member of the LMA Board of Directors.]

U.S. STATES

California

Californians for Civil Marriage:
http://www.lambdalegal.org/cgi-bin/iowa/states/record?record=5#Marriage -- Dedicated to the education of Californians about the need for equal access to
marriage for all loving, committed American couples, regardless of sexual orientation.

Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund:
http://www.lambdalegal.org/cgi-bin/iowa/documents/record?record=531 -- California Marriage Law.

Marriage Equality California (MECA):
http://marriageequalityca.org/index.php -- A statewide, grassroots organization to secure the freedom and the right of same-sex couples to enter into legally-recognized civil marriage.

PFLAG Marriage Committee San Jose/Peninsula:
http://www.pflagsanjose.org/marry/ -- Supporting equal access to the rights and responsibilities of civil marriage.

Colorado

Marriage Equality Colorado (MECO):
http://www.marriageequalityco.com/

Connecticut

Love Makes a Family (LMF):
http://www.lmfct.org -- A statewide coalition of organizations and individuals working to expand Connecticut’s marriage laws to include same-gender couples.

Hawaii

The Civil Unions-Civil Rights Movement:
http://www.civilunions-civilrights.org -- (Confirm this one. I've been told by e-mail from Hawaii that it's a good URL. But "Not available" when I checked.)

Hawai`i Gay Marriage Bureau:
http://www.hawaiigaymarriage.com/ -- Provides a registration, referral and informational forum for those interested in same-sex marriage registration, marriage certificates, related services and updates on the legal front.

Marriage Project Hawai`i:
http://members.tripod.com/~MPHAWAII/ -- A campaign to win the civil rights of marriage in Hawaii.

Massachusetts

The Freedom to Marry Coalition of Massachusetts:
http://www.ftmmass.org/ -- Engages in grassroots education, advocacy, and lobbying in support of civil marriage rights for same-sex couples.

Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders:
http://www.glad.org -- Currently suing in Massachusetts for full marriage rights.

The Massachusetts Campaign for Equality:
http://massequality.org/ -- Fighting the Massachusetts "Super DOMA" initiative.

Norwood-Walpole Citizens for All Families:
http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/allfamilies/ -- Norwood, Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Hampshire Freedom to Marry:
http://www.nhftm.org

New Jersey

Gay and Lesbian Political Action and Support Groups (GayPASG):
http://www.gaypasg.org/SSMTF.htm -- Task Force for Same-Sex Marriage, an alliance of individuals and organizations in New Jersey committed to civil same-sex marriage through grassroots organizing, public education and political action.

New York

Marriage Equality New York (MENY):
http://www.marriageequalityny.org/

The Wedding Party:
http://www.theweddingparty.org/ -- A coalition that supports same-sex commitment and equal marriage rights.

Oregon

Love Makes a Family:
http://www.lmfamily.org/ -- Working for social change to create a supportive environment within our communities and to provide a public voice for all families, especially those subjected to social, economic, and legal discrimination due to sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania Freedom to Marry Coalition:
http://www.paftmc.org/

Vermont

Gay Wedding Guide:
http://www.gayweddingguide.com/

Vermonters Civil Union Resource Guide:
http://www.vermontcivilunion.com/ -- A resource guide to civil unions in Vermont.

Vermonters for Civil Unions:
http://www.vtcivilunionpac.org/ -- Committed to electing pro-civil union legislators and statewide officers in Vermont.

Vermont Freedom to Marry Action Committee:
http://www.vtmarriageaction.org/ -- A lobbying organization dedicated to protecting the civil union law from repeal or undermining changes.

Vermont Freedom to Marry Task Force:
http://www.vtfreetomarry.org/ -- The core values that unite VFMTF are the beliefs that gay and lesbian Vermonters should have the same legal choices as our heterosexual counterparts, and that laws which treat us and our relationships as second class denigrate all of us, regardless of our desire to marry.

Washington

Legal Marriage Alliance of Washington:
http://www.lmaw.org/ -- A nonprofit organization educating the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered community and the general public on how to advance the civil right of same-sex couples to legal marriage.

STUDENT NETWORKS

Same-Sex Marriage Student Network:
http://www.geocities.com/billtickner/ -- Compiling support from across the nation.

WEB RINGS

The Queer Wedding Web Ring:
http://www.angelfire.com/me/queerwedding/ -- Created to celebrate the Weddings, Unions and Commitment Ceremonies of Lesbian and Gay couples.

OPPOSITION

Alliance for Marriage:
http://www.allianceformarriage.org/ -- Dedicated to promoting marriage [one man-one woman] and addressing the epidemic of fatherless families in the United States.

Alternatives to Marriage Project:
http://www.unmarried.org -- Not exactly "opposition" to same-sex marriage, but the organization objects to marriage as a worthwhile political goal. The Alternatives to Marriage Project (ATMP) is a national nonprofit organization advocating for equality and fairness for unmarried people, including people who choose not to marry, cannot marry, or
live together before marriage.

Campaign for California Families:
http://www.savecalifornia.com/ -- Fighting to restore family-friendly values.

The Center for Reclaiming America:
http://www.reclaimamerica.org/ -- D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Ministries and Janet Folger, "coordinator of the 1998 "Truth In Love" campaign that carried the message of hope for change to those struggling with homosexuality."

Citizen Link:
http://www.family.org/cforum/topics/a0018799.cfm -- Family issues in policy and culture.

Citizens for Community Values (Cincinnati, Ohio):
http://www.ccv.org/ccv-red-Issues-Homosexuality.htm -- "Homosexual activists are not simply seeking acceptance of homosexual relationships. Rather, the primary, clearly stated focus of their agenda is normalization, complete social acceptance, of homosexual relationships and the undermining of the traditional family."

Concerned Women for America:
http://www.cwfa.org/library/family/2000-08-28_pp_hs-marriage.shtml

Family Research Council:
http://www.frc.org/get/lh01l1.cfm -- "We urge Americans to help preserve traditional marriage and family at all levels of government. "

Family Research Institute:
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet7.html -- Paul Cameron: "A large body of scientific evidence suggests that homosexual marriage is a defective counterfeit of traditional marriage and that it poses a clear and present danger to the health of the community." [Note: Cameron was in Seattle in 1985 opposing King County's anti-discrimination ordinance. One report pointed out he had once advocated for, among other things, the eating of cats and dogs to help stave off hunger in America. He is not a man that would be easily confused by any facts. -- Roger]

Focus on the Family:
http://www.family.org/cforum/research/papers/a0013151.html -- "Focus on the Family holds this institution in the highest esteem, and strongly opposes any legal sanction of marriage counterfeits, such as the legalization of same-sex "marriage" or the granting of marriage-like benefits to same-sex couples, cohabiting couples, or any other non-marital relationship. "

Marriage Law Project:
http://marriagelaw.cua.edu/ -- Mission: to reaffirm the legal definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

Massachusetts Conservative PAC:
http://www.masscitizens.org -- Opponents of the efforts in Massachusetts.

Traditional Values Coalition:
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/ -- Lou Sheldon's group.

Today, a group of representatives in Congress have tried to make a splash by announcing the "Federal Marriage Amendment," which they dream would amend the Constitution so that no state anywhere could ever give same sex couples the right to marry legally or anything even resembling that. Can you believe that this group would call itself "multi-cultural?"

There's another good marriage equality website at www.allianceformarriage.org. This organization appears to be in Virginia. It has extensive coverage of the proposed amendment and describes its potential impact.

I don't take this to be a serious threat at this point. There are only a handful of co-sponsors of the proposal, though they act like they think they speak for all of America. This sort of hubris and heterosexism has been a plague on civilization for a long, long time. I feel more sickened than frightened by this proposal. However, the answer for all of us is clear: write to our Representatives and Senators and urge them to oppose this hostile measure, to commit to vote against it, to block it at any turn they can, and, in fact, to use it as a springboard to moving toward the just resolution of this question, the repeal of the federal so-called "Defense of Marriage Act" and the enactment in all the states of marriage equality for couples who happen to be of the same sex.

A message from the Marriage list today is worth repeating here, for it puts the matter of a constitutional amendment into context and explains how our Constitution is actually set up as regards amendments and such. The message is essentially correct, from what I know, and I have some experience in this area: in 1965, while a college intern with Indiana Senator Birch E. Bayh, Jr. (father of Indiana's current Senator Evan Bayh), I was able to observe the process first-hand. Senator Bayh was the author of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, which is on presidential succession and disability. It passed the Congress that summer and went out to the states for ratification. It was, indeed, ratified, and that is how Gerald Ford became an appointed Vice President (with approval by Congress) under Nixon (and succeeded to the presidency on his resignation) and how Nelson Rockefeller stepped into the Vice President's position under Gerald Ford. All of us in Senator Bayh's office became experts on amending the U.S. Constitution.

The message from the Marriage List as authored by Micheal T. McLoughlin, D.Jur., M.A. appears below. I have left in all of the references to the Marriage List itself, so you can both see an example of what it can deliver every day to your own email box and find, at the end, instructions on how to join it.

-----Original Message-----
From: marriage-admin@lists.qrd.org
[mailto:marriage-admin@lists.qrd.org]On Behalf Of Micheal T McLoughlin
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 3:16 AM
To: marriage@lists.qrd.org
Cc: tips@upi.com
Subject: Re: [*M*] US: Group seeks federal marriage amendment

On Tue, 14 May 2002, John Wilkinson forwarded:

> United Press International, May 14, 2002
> http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=14052002-053040-3458r
> Group seeks federal marriage amendment
> By Kathy A. Gambrell, White House reporter

[snip]

> Congress last amended the Constitution in 1971 when it allowed 18-year-olds
> the right to vote.

A point of legal clarification that Ms. Gambrell and UPI have missed.
Congress can PROPOSE an amendment to the Constitution but Congress does
NOT amend the Constitution - the STATES do that.

There are two ways to propose an amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

1. Congress, with two-thirds of both houses concurring, can propose an
amendment; or
2. Upon request by two-thirds of the states, Congress must call a
constitutional convention.

The President has no power to propose amendments to the Constitution, nor
can the President prohibit the proposal of an amendment. He (or,
eventually, she) is simply not part of the process. Neither is the
Supreme Court part of the process, but it and lower courts can hear cases
concerning whether an amendment has been proposed as U.S. Const., Art. V.
directs.

Note: Presidents can *ask* Congress to propose an amendment, just as you
or I or anybody else in the world can ask the U.S. Congress to do
something. But while Congress is obligated to consider any *legislation*
the President might propose (the President does have *that* power), it is
not bound to consider a request from the President to amend the
Constitution, any more than it is bound to consider a request from anyone
else - because Constitutional amendments are not legislation. The
President can veto legislation. The President *can't* veto a proposed
amendment to the Constitution.

Once an amendment is proposed, it is sent to the states for ratification.
There are two ways for a proposed amendment to be ratified:

1. The legislatures of three-fourths of the states approve the proposed
amendment; or
2. Constitutional conventions in three-fourths of the states approve the
proposed amendment.

Congress must identify which method of ratification shall be used. In
either case, there are 50 states; 75% of 50 is 37.5, so at least 38
states must ratify a proposed amendment before it becomes part of the
Constitution.

Again, the President has no role in the process but is the same as any
ordinary citizen in his home state. The Supreme Court cannot rule on the
constitutionality of a proposed amendment per se - since it's not part of
the Constitution yet, and once it *is* part of the Constitution it *must*
be constitutional. Neither can the Supreme Court give an opinion as to
how the proposed amendment would affect the rest of the Constitution or
existing federal and state laws, because that kind of opinion does not
involve a case or an active controversy - and U.S. Const. Art. III
specifies the Supreme Court can only hear cases and controversies. But,
again, the Supreme Court and lower federal and/or state courts CAN hear
cases about the constitutional validity of the process by which a proposed
amendment is ratified.

For hypothetical example: If 38 states ratify a proposed amendment, some
by legislative action and some by state conventions, a question would
arise whether the amendment was properly ratified - because U.S. Const.,
Art. V specifies ratification must be by either legislative action or
convention, not by both. So, this hypothetical amendment would not have
been properly ratified, and would not be part of the Constitution.
Additionally, if Congress did not specify how this amendment should have
been ratified by the 38 states, then the way in which the amendment was
proposed would have been unconstitutional - which would throw out all of
the ratifications, even if they had been valid, because a state cannot
validly ratify and invalidly proposed amendment.

Note that ratification of the Constitution itself was the subject of U.S.
Const. Art. VII, not Art. V. Under Art. VII, the Constitution took effect
when 9 of the 13 states (i.e., 9) ratified it but it only applied to those
states that did ratify it. George Washington had been President for a
full year before Rhode Island ratified the Constitution and, during that
time, Rhode Island was not bound by the Constitution.

Not so with amendments produced under Art. V. All amendments to the
Constitution are binding on all states, whether they ratify them or not.

Regarding Congress proposing an amendment, a key phrase in U.S. Const.,
Art. V is "whenever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary."

Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. In the time since,
the Hawaii Supreme Court dismissed the case *Baehr v. Miike* because the
Hawaiian Constitution had been amended to allow the Hawaii Legislature to
limit marriage to one man and one woman. The Vermont Supreme Court held
that either marriage or an equivalent framework must be made available to
same-sex couples. The Vermont Legislature then enacted civil unions
legislation to provide the parallel framework, while reserving (in that
same law) the status of marriage to one man and one woman. California has
created state level domestic partnership, and is considering civil unions,
but it is not considering same-sex marriage. There is a case underway in
Massachusetts, and Connecticut is pondering the civil unions issue.

So, this is pretty much a "non-issue" on the agenda of 45 of the 50
states, many of which have either passed laws prohibiting same-sex
marriage or explicitly recognising it as an interpersonal status between
one man and one woman. And even the 5 states that have passed or have
considered legislation concerning same-sex couples have not considered
same-sex marriage, except for the case that's pending appeal in
Massachusetts. So, same-sex marriage is really an "agenda issue" in only
1 state out of 50.

That rather begs the question whether Congress can properly deem this
issue "necessary" for purposes of proposing an amendment to the U.S.
Constitution - as the Constitution itself requires.
*******************************************************************
Micheal T. McLoughlin, D.Jur., M.A. agentq@umich.edu
San Francisco, California Ann Arbor, Michigan
_______________________________________________
marriage mailing list
To post to the list, send to:
mailto:marriage@lists.qrd.org
To subscribe/unsubscribe/change options:
http://lists.qrd.org/mailman/listinfo/marriage
Admin/Moderator contact:
mailto:marriage-admin@lists.qrd.org

Free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org

I want to recommend a good Web site for the pursuit of legal marriage in Canada. Take a look at www.marriageequality.ca. This is an excellent example of a Web site that is well maintained. We have been proud of our (LMA Web site for its content, particularly our "Quick Answers" feature (4th pick on the left). It will take new volunteer help to redesign and maintain our site so it might compare favorably to others.

At today's Board of Directors meeting of the Legal Marriage Alliance of Washington, we adopted a draft Petition which we will soon begin to circulate in the State of Washington. It is not an initiative petition or any other legislative enactment. It is a good old-fashioned petition for redress of grievances, to be signed by people who say they believe in what it says. Here is the text we agreed to present:

We, the undersigned residents of the State of Washington, believe that any adult couple should be free to enter into a legal marriage regardless of their sex, gender, or sexual orientation, if they have chosen each other and are prepared to devote the love, effort, commitment, and sacrifice necessary to build a life together. We urge the people of the State of Washington and the members of the Washington State Legislature to recognize that civil marriage is a legal status that is separate and distinct from religious, ethnic, and any other marriage traditions, and that civil marriage carries with it a multitude of responsibilities, rights, and privileges that should be equally available to all adults in our society without regard to sex, gender, or sexual orientation.

We call on our representatives and community leaders to express their support for changing state and federal laws to achieve full equality under the law for everyone by permitting legal marriage without regard to the sex, gender, or sexual orientation of the couple. Accordingly, we call on the Washington Legislature to amend RCW 26.04 by removing references to sex and gender as eligibility requirements for a civil marriage license. We call on the United States Congress and the president to repeal the so-called, “Defense of Marriage Act,” to remove from federal laws all prejudice, restrictions, and disqualifications related to marital status based solely on sex, gender, or sexual orientation.

We hereby declare that as a fundamental matter of social justice, an affirmation of human and civil rights, and the measure of full equality under the Constitution and the laws of the United States and the State of Washington, same-sex couples should have the right to marry legally.

Watch for our Petition. It will be unveiled first at the "Out and About" in Pasco, Washington, May 25th. After that, it should be available for review and signature at most of the Pride events in our state.

I've been a longtime activist in the Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgender (GLBT) community, working since the 1970s to attain equality and human dignity for us, socially and politically. Starting in 1995, I became involved in forming the Legal Marriage Alliance of Washington (LMAW), whose Web site is well worth viewing at www.lmaw.org This is now my second year as the President of the Board of Directors of this non-profit advocacy group.

I will use this blog as a place to bring together information, ideas, links, and arguments for this cause to which I am so fully committed. I'll draw on the experience I've had in the past in the GLBT movement (from before the "BT" part was even defined) and share what I can, in hopes it might help others to learn from example, to avoid pitfalls I have seen, and to make further progress.

I believe our efforts must produce concrete results that help real people in their lives. This is why I have tried to avoid linking these issues with any ideology, religion, or other theoretical perspective. The progress toward civil rights is slow enough as it is; it would be slower still if it had to wait on the most idealistic revolution, to be achieved only when perfect justice arrives. I've seen numerous concrete benefits result from a relatively few years' effort and am proud to have contributed to progress within the Seattle/Washington State area where I have focused my attention and energies.