Jflust 20.2004
h’ [U :u; i'i'i Sinews
van Wolfson is an attorney, constitu
tional scholar and, perhaps, the great-
est visionary working today in the gay
rights movement. Ever since 1983,
.... i «OF when he wrote his Harvard Law
School thesis on the subject (it was titled “Same-
Sex Marriage and Morality: The Human Rights
Vision of the Constitution”), he has Reused his
laserlike intellect on the issue of marriage equality.
Ten years after his thesis, Wolfson was co
counsel when the Hawaii Supreme Court
required the state to show a compelling reason
why gays and lesbians should not marry. (At the
time he was working as the marriage project
director for Lambda Legal Defense and Education
Fund.) He also lent his expertise to the historic
legal efforts in Vermont and Massachusetts that
led to civil unions and marriages in those states.
Wolfson left Lambda in early 2003 to become
executive director of the Freedom to Marry
Coalition, a think tank dedicated to bringing
“new resources and a renewed context of urgency
and opportunity to this social justice movement.”
Now he has written Why Marriage Matters: Amer
ica, Equality and Gay People's Right to Marry, a log
ical and compelling kx>k at the arguments for and
against marriage equality.
Just Out sat down with Wolfson earlier this
month while he was in Portland promoting
the book.
Floyd Sklaver: How
did you become involved in
the marriage equality issue?
Evan Wolfson: Why I
wrote [my thesis) paper was a
hxik that changed my life, and
that was John Boswell’s Chris
tianity, Social Tolerance and
Homosexuality. It’s a major work
by an eminent, openly gay histo
rian. The main point is that the
way in which Western society
treats gay people today is not the
way it always was and it can
change. That had the effect of turn
ing my personal experience to some
thing political.
FS: You were a visionary back in 1983
because no one was speaking about marriage
equality then.
EW: I was certainly not the first person to come
up with this. In fact, since the dawn of the gay civil
rights movement in 1969, there were cases filed by
couples seeking the freedom to marry. Within two
years of Stonewall there were at least three cases
making their way up through the courts of various
states.... When those cases were filed and those
people stepped forward to challenge the exclusion,
this society truly wasn’t ready for it. We hadn’t bro
L iberty and J ustice
for A ll
A conversation with Evan Wolfson
ken the silence about gay people’s lives. Obviously
a lot has changed [including) the AIDS epidemic,
which transformed a lot of people’s thinking about
who gay people are and how the denial of the pro
tections for families harms us.
FS: In June you were quoted as saying,
“We are winning” the fight for marriage equal
ity. Do you still think we are?
EW: Let me be clear. Winning doesn’t mean
that we win every battle; winning doesn’t mean
that we are not going to take hits. Right now
there’s an organized political camp against us (by]
those who oppose equality...and they’re mount
ing attacks on at least a dozen states. We are
going to lose many, if not most, of those first-wave
attacks. But it’s also true that any year in which
you win marriage in Massachusetts, and have
couples marry in Oregon and Canada
and elsewhere, and come home to
begin role mixleling for their neigh
bors the realities so that people’s
hearts and minds can begin to
open.. .is a winning year.
FS: Missouri passed a constitu
tional amendment Aug. 3 ban
ning same-sex marriage by an
overwhelming 74 percent. What
lessons do we need to learn
from the defeat?
EW: Number one, start now
because this is a long-term con
versation which involves a sus
tained, reasoned discussion,
outreach and personal asking,
and personal storytelling. Number two, we have
to engage the middle. My mantra running
around the country for years has been “There’s
no marriage without engagement.” We’re
engaging the reachable, but not yet reached,
middle of the public—the people who, on the
one hand, are uncomfortable with this but, on
the other hand, want to be fair.... They need to
hear [our] stories.... And with the mix of stories,
we add in one more truth and that is: It is wrong,
discriminatory and un-American to deny people
equality—particularly when it would hurt no
one to do so. Gays are not going to use up all the
marriage licenses. There’s enough equality to
share.
Professional Tree Care
Pruning Lessons
503.310.5036
ccb#l 41020
Beautiful Trees Through Knowledge and Caring Service
by Floyd Sklaver
FS: What do you say to gay people who
argue that we are moving too fast and are
concerned about a potential backlash?
EW: Think back to the first couple
that got married in San Francisco, Del
Martin and Phyllis Lyon, two days short
of their 51st anniversary. How much
longer do they have to wait?
FS: What strategies should we
be taking here in Oregon?
EW: 1 think it’s important to
acknowledge fair-minded peo
ple's discomfort but that
they...owe it to themselves
and this state to have the con
versation and not shut it down
in something they’ll regret for
all time.... We need to get those
stories of real neighbors and family
members here...and we need to get them
in front of people and we need to build
a coalition of nongay and gay organizations
who can reach to various parts of the state.
We need to reach out to women.
We need to mobilize younger people
who overwhelmingly support us here.
Evan Wolfson came to Portland earlier this month to promote
We need to make sure that our
his new book, Why Marriage Matters
people turn out to vote.
-5*
FS: Why isn’t the same thing going to hap
pen here as in Missouri?
EW: 1 think the people in Oregon have much
more experience fighting these types of measures.
You’ve seen this enemy before, you’ve defeated
them before, you know how to build a coalition,
and you start with a more receptive public.
FS: Do you think it’s important that we end
up with the word marriage and, if so, why?
EW: I think it’s important that we end up with
equality. One of the main protections that comes
with marriage is the word. When you say I’m mar
ried, everyone knows who you are in relationship
to the primary person in your life.... There is no
substitute for the clarity, security, dignity and
equality that comes with marriage.... Let me put it
another way: If civil union or domestic partnership,
or whatever anyone wants to call it other than
marriage, were the same as marriage, then why do
we need two lines at the clerk’s office?
Me
FLOYD S klaver is
For information
tell 503-318-6046
email JohnMycrsCars"aol.c om
Big City Produce
Me too
c
|
rr-,
\
-/
722 N Summer at Albina
local folks, local produce, organics, etc
_
Free Consultations
Interest Only
No Down Payment Options
First Time Home Buyers
a Portland free-lance journalist.
JOHN MYERS
Your Schedule is My Schedule
Russell Leggroan • cell: 503-750-3350 • Lrussell5@msn.com
503-722-3842 • 888-635-5446
415 17th Street, Suite 5, Oregon City, OR 97045
FS: How does it feel to be included on
Time magazine’s list of 100 Most Influential
People in the World?
EW: Well, of course on one level it was
very gratifying and exciting but also in all hon
esty felt very overstated and overwhelming. I
really see it as less about me and more a state
ment by Time magazine that marriage equality
for gay people is a civil rights question whose
time has come. jm
HEW & USED
CARS & TRUCKS
Don’t Miss the Rate Train!
•
•
•
•
FS: So for you, civil unions would be an
unacceptable alternative.
EW: Civil union exists in one state. It’s not
as if there are two equally beautiful systems out
there and one is simply being asked to step over
to the right rather than the left. The system that
protects people in every area of life, in every area
of law and in every state is called marriage.
B eets ,, ,
”
rue. weu. mw
Paying
PF4C.eS
W 460 3830
r KCCawad«
2 blocks -s
L M
15