|
Gay Couple in Washington Can Now Say They're Married (Litchfield County Times)
Thursday, November 20, 2008
By: Jack Coraggio
WASHINGTON-Though they are only newlyweds, Joe Mustich and Ken Cornet come across like the traditional old married couple. After 29 years together, they finish each other's sentences, point out individual idiosyncrasies and when one of them begins to prattle on, the other rolls his eyes in here-he-goes-again fashion.
But there is nothing traditional about their formal union.
Last Wednesday, about a month after the Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled that forbidding same sex marriage is unconstitutional, Mr. Mustich and Mr. Cornet marched into Bryan Memorial Town Hall and, in front of a slew of photographers, the American flag and a bust of George Washington, officially tied the knot. Following the court ruling, the state didn't start issuing the licenses until Nov. 12, their wedding day.
"I like being able to say that we are married, instead of all the other words we used to use," said Mr. Mustich. "We had a civil union a few years ago, but this is more about being able to say we are married."
Considering that they have been together for about three decades and have owned a home on Nettleton Hollow Road since 1993, these two New York natives' marriage doesn't represent any big lifestyle alteration. They have no desire to change their surnames, they don't wear wedding bands and they won't even reschedule their longtime anniversary date, Sept. 7, the day they met each other in 1979.
As Mr. Mustich pointed out, probably the biggest change they'll face will be in their day-to-day vocabulary. After all, now they can refer to each other with a precise "spouse," as opposed to the slightly more ambiguous "partner," a relative term for Mr. Cornet and Mr. Mustich considering they're also business partners in their own local real estate venture.
For these two newlyweds, who are both Justices of the Peace who have presided over a number of heterosexual marriages, this redefinition of the world's oldest institution is more about the righting of a great wrong.
"Marriage is a secular institution and always has been," commented Mr. Cornet. "Separation of church and state is what this country was founded on, yet this doesn't seem to resonate in the consciousness of many people."
Mr. Cornet challenges the idea that religious institutions can define or influence the parameters of marriage. He takes umbrage with the fact that California briefly permitted same sex marriage, only to have voters overturn that ruling this past election cycle when a referendum proposed and petitioned by various Christian organizations was placed on the ballot.
Considering California tends to lean left both politically and socially, this overturning vote came as a surprise to many in the gay rights community.
Anne Stanback, the executive director of Connecticut's nonprofit organization for marriage equality, Love Makes a Family, told The Litchfield County Times that the forces who petitioned to get the referendum on the California ballot also put a heavy amount of money into circulating "misinformation" about gay marriage. There are currently four lawsuits filed in the Golden State to overturn that vote.
"You can't vote against civil rights. In the [1950s] there were 16 states where blacks and whites couldn't get married," said Mr. Mustich. "It's fine to say that people voted on it, but is it fair to allow people to vote on other people's rights?"
The only two states that allow same sex marriage are Connecticut and Massachusetts, though three other states allow the civil unions intended to permit homosexual couples the same rights and privileges enjoyed by married couples. Still, though many gay rights activists consider civil unions a step in the right direction, they feel it carries a segregation stigma.
"The word marriage is a protection; people understand it," stated Ms. Stanback. "Many institutions didn't understand civil unions. There have been cases where hospitals and funeral homes didn't recognize them."
Nor, for that matter, does the federal government. And under the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, the federal government ruled that states that don't allow civil unions don't have to recognize them. So Mr. Mustich and Mr. Cornet can file their state tax returns jointly, but for federal returns, they have to prepare them jointly and separately, though they can only file separately.
"Put it to you this way, tax preparation is enough of a headache, and same sex couples have it even worse," said Ms. Stanback, who also noted that same sex couples are still ineligible for a deceased partner's Social Security benefits.
Mr. Mustich and Mr. Cornet, two longtime partners some 13 years apart in age (Mr. Cornet is 67 while Mr. Mustich is 54), who have the kind of caring relationship that would make many heterosexual couples envious, wonder aloud the true intent of the Defense of Marriage Act.
"I have to ask, what exactly they are defending?" asked Mr. Cornet. "I say, 'If you don't want gay marriage, then don't have one.'"
|
|
|
