Not only should the Governor sign the bill, he should do so as a celebration of Pride.
Six years ago I was writing at RIFuture.org, and I stumbled across an interesting piece of legislative discrimination. Despite Marriage Equality – the right for LGBTQ couples to marry – being passed in 2013, there were some legislators so blinded by homophobia that they had figured out a way to continue to vote against LGBTQ marriages two years later.
In fact the
practice of sitting in judgement on marriages, certifying some as worthy of a
vote and some as unworthy, continues in some form or another to this very day.
But that may be ending soon.
When
the General Assembly abruptly ended its legislative season this year, it did so
having passed 117 “Solemnization of Marriage” bills. These bills are
perfunctory legislative favors done by Representatives and Senators for their
constituents. Essentially, if a couple wishes to be married, but the officiant
of their dreams is not permitted to marry the couple by law, a “Solemnization
of Marriage” bill allows a one time exception.
With
this bill passed, a beloved relative or family friend will now be able to
conduct the wedding ceremony. Because these bills are so common, they are
usually bundled together as part of a “consent calendar” which is passed with
little discussion and no fanfare.
Many
who voted against same-sex marriage two years ago continue that battle today
and some new legislators have joined the fight by voting against solemnization
of marriage bills for same-sex couples. This means that anyone seeking these
perfunctory legislative favors are now putting themselves in a position to have
their marriage judged by religious conservatives. These votes served to remind
25 couples that their marriage is not worthy of the same level of respect as
others.
Out
of the 117 solemnization bills passed last year, six were for couples with
names that are traditionally associated with the same sex. Misty and Dawn,
Elizabeth and Nancy, Alicia and Laura, William and Michael, Kristin and
Rebecca, and Emilie and Michelle all sought and received solemnization of
marriage bills. Two other couples, Sarah and Chris and Rebeccah and Alex may or
not be same-sex couples, judging from the names. Of course, perusing the names
like this is by no means a perfect system, so I apologize if I have missed or
mischaracterized anyone based solely on a heteronormative reading of their
name.
Consistently
voting against same-sex marriages are Representatives Samuel
Azzinaro, Arthur
Corvese and Robert
Phillips. Reps Justin Price, Joseph Trillo, Robert Lancia and Sherry
Roberts frequently vote against same-sex solemnization bills.
Because
solemnization bills are frequently bundled and passed together on a consent
calendar, oftentimes these legislators find themselves voting against opposite
sex marriages that happen to be part of a bundle that contains just one
same-sex marriage. On May 19 Azzinaro, Corvese, Lancia, Phillips, Price,
Roberts and Trillo voted against 5 marriages in total because William wanted to
marry Michael. And On May 12 Azzinaro, Corvese, Phillips, Price and Trillo
voted against 6 marriages because Alicia wanted to marry Rose.
I
spoke by phone with Rep. Azzinaro, a Democrat serving District 37 in Westerly,
about his no votes, which he says are based on his religious beliefs. Azzinaro
introduced 7 solemnization bills last season, all of which passed without a
single no vote.
“It’s
not in my belief,” said Azzinaro about same sex marriage, “I didn’t vote for it
when it was brought to the House for a vote and I don’t feel I can vote for any
of these same-sex marriages.”
I
asked how legislators determine which bills are for same-sex marriages and
which are for opposite sex marriages. “We usually try to find out also from the
sponsor of the bill if it’s a male and a female or a same-sex couple marriage,
if we’re not sure,” Azzinaro said.
He
went on to say that if a same sex couple in his district came to him and asked
him to submit a solemnization of marriage bill before the House, he would tell
them no. I asked him how he thinks his constituents would feel about that,
given that he discriminates against his same-sex constituents in what kind of
services he offers, based on their sexual orientation.
“They
have to know who I am, how I feel,” he said.
Sadly, the piece above had little effect on the offending legislators, or on then Speaker of the House Nicholas Mattiello (Democrat, District 15, Cranston), who thought of these solemnization bills as little favors legislators could do for their constituents, and gave little thought to the fact that some marriages were now, in the eyes of the Rhode Island general Assembly, more worthy than others.
I ended up writing more pieces about the
practice, at least eight more times. It happened in the Senate and the House
during Judiciary Hearings. It happened on the floor. Sometimes the votes would
be disguised by bundling the bills together and not really announcing why they
were leaving one particular marriage bill aside for a separate vote.
Here
are some of the pieces I’ve written since 2015:
RI Senate still allowing legislators
to treat some marriages differently than others
The battle for Marriage Equality in
Rhode Island continues
All marriages are equal, but some
marriages are more equal than others…
In the eyes of certain State
Senators, some marriages are less worthy
Four members of the Rhode Island
House just voted against a gay wedding…
General
Assembly persists in its policy of institutionalized bigotry against the LGBTQ
community
Separate and
Unequal: How certain State Senators continue to pass judgement on same sex
marriages
RI General
Assembly still voting on marriage equality
Now, the General Assembly announced that they had successfully passed legislation doing away with the legislative system of solemnizing weddings. Instead of appealing to the legislature and requiring a vote, the system will be automated through the Rhode Island Secretary of State‘s office.
The act (S0014B / H5034A) would allow the governor to designate any adult to solemnize a marriage within the state on a particular day and within a particular city or town.
The
authorization would expire upon completion of the marriage. A fee in the amount
of $25 would be a prerequisite and would be payable to the secretary of state,
or a fee of $20 for applications that are submitted electronically.
Sadly,
the sponsors, Senator Michael McCaffrey (Democrat, District 29,
Warwick) and Representative Katherine Kazarian (Democrat, District
63, East Providence) did not mention that the legislative administration of the
solemnization process was often discriminatory as a reason to pass the bill.
“It
is an inconvenience to the people of Rhode Island that they need to seek a
formal act of law just because they want a friend or family member to officiate
at their wedding,” said Senator McCaffrey. “Votes and committee meetings are
also a very inefficient way to handle what amounts to a clerical task. Getting
married should be a joyous occasion, and there’s no reason the state needs to
bog it down with red tape.”
“This bill will modernize the process by placing it online and ensuring that it’s available to all Rhode Islanders year round,” said Representative Kazarian.
“Some time ago, I was contacted by a constituent in July about their nuptials
scheduled for September. Unfortunately, the General Assembly had already
concluded its session for the year and there was no other alternative possible.
It broke my heart when I had to tell my constituent there was nothing more that
I could offer to ensure their perfect wedding with the officiant of their
choice and this is why passing this legislation will modernize our system and
make the process more accessible and customer-friendly for all Rhode Islanders.”
Still, those testifying in committee understood the importance of the bill in securing equity for LGBTQ marriages. During the judiciary committee hearing on Senator McCaffrey’s bill both Hilary Levy Friedman, President of Rhode Island NOW and LGBTQ activist and advocate Wendy Becker testified as to the bill’s importance in protecting the dignity of LGBTQ marriages.
The
bill, passed now by the Senate and the House, moves on to the desk of
Governor Daniel McKee. Asked at his press conference on Tuesday about the
bill, the Governor seemed unaware of it. Not only should the Governor sign the
bill, he should do so as a celebration of Pride.