Dan Savage | Gay Marriage | News | Washington

Dan Savage And Terry Miller Are Now Married In Washington: PHOTO


The moment has arrived: a decade after tying the knot in Canada, a marriage legally meaningless here in the States, author and activist Dan Savage wed Terry Miller in Washington State. And Twitter user kateleroux was there to capture the moment.

So, what now? According to Savage's Twitter, "It's time to consumate this thing." Right on.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Was the nom dude invited to the reception?

    Posted by: rick scatorum | Dec 10, 2012 2:28:55 AM

  2. Where is their son? It's funy because I read both of Savage's autobiographical books, and during his first Canadian wedding, their kid had gotten into his head (thanks to school I think) that two men couldn't legally "marry" (but of course his parents should stay together "forever").

    I'd like to know, 10 years later (he must be a teenager now) what he feels like. Much differently I'm sure.

    Posted by: G.I. Joe | Dec 10, 2012 3:00:49 AM

  3. Handsome couple.

    Posted by: Peter | Dec 10, 2012 6:11:40 AM

  4. They remarried in Washington state because they wanted to remarry in their home state. But they would have been regarded as married had they not chosen to remarry.

    Canadian marriages (or Dutch marriages, or Spanish marriages, or South African marriages, or marriages from the other countries where we can wed) are legal in the states where we can marry. Those foreign marriages are just as legal as marriages performed in those states (and just as ignored in hostile states).

    Frankly, I'm a bit disappointed to see the old jingoistic "USA! USA!" sentiment emerging in marriage-equality circles. A wedding in your home state might have some special meaning to you, but it has no higher legal status than a marriage by two Washingtonians in New York, or in Massachusetts, or in Ontario, or in British Columbia.

    Posted by: K in VA | Dec 10, 2012 8:35:19 AM

  5. The Windsor case, that SCOTUS just agreed to hear, rests on the validity of a Canadian marriage --- which was recognized by New York at the time of her wife's death. No different than if the marriage had been performed in Massachusetts.

    In California, if someone wants to go the extra mile, all they need to do is take their Canadian marriage documents to the local County Clerk, fill out some paperwork, and their marriage is then registered in the US.

    This remains the case, provided the marriage was performed prior to the day that Prop 8 passed. Once SCOTUS invalidates Prop 8, this date constraint will vanish.

    Posted by: Paul | Dec 10, 2012 10:36:08 AM

  6. Why are so many people poo-pooing Dan Savage's marriage by saying they were already married in Canada, so why get re-married???? What's wrong with you people?? Are you a paid group of trolls who follow Savage around everywhere online just to criticize everything he does? It's a beautiful thing that he was FINALLY able to get married in his home state. Why wouldn't he want to celebrate by marrying his partner there. Good for him! Very happy for him and his partner! If you're naysaying this, you're a troll or a sad, bitter queen.

    Posted by: Gary A | Dec 10, 2012 11:26:08 AM

  7. The legal issue is whether a Canadian marriage in the past applies to the new law in Wash. state. There are possibly clauses in the state marriage laws that deal with this, though probably no one thought of a precedent like this, so maybe not. A gay Canadian marriage would not be in force in a state that does not recognize gay marriage, just like polygamous marriages would not be recognized, but that's not like they suddenly get divorced. It's meaningless for Savage and hubby now, as they are legally married in their own state, which supersedes their Canadian marriage rights and which is more contemporaneous. Should they move to Oregon, they would not suddenly be "divorced", but their marriage status would depend on legal precedent.

    Posted by: anon | Dec 10, 2012 11:26:17 AM

  8. Damn! I wanted to marry Dan.

    Posted by: Ted | Dec 10, 2012 1:33:23 PM

  9. It's nice that someone still gets dressed up for a special occasion. Setting some standards here.

    Posted by: Bingo | Dec 10, 2012 2:12:28 PM

  10. I have seen that picture about twenty times now
    And I just have to stop again and enjoy each time

    Posted by: Bob | Dec 10, 2012 2:33:44 PM

  11. What Gary A said.

    PLUS - I can't understand people who think there's something wrong with getting married more than once.

    First of all, why not? Who does it hurt? It's fun and makes a better hobby than trolling around and making bitter comments on a blog.

    Second, the law is complicated. Given the vagaries of equal marriage in the United States right now and the fact that the Supreme Court is going to be wading in to this topic in the next 6 or 7 months, I would tell people to get married/partnered everywhere you reasonably can. Until equal marriage is legal everywhere, it can't hurt to pile up the evidence. Who knows in five years whether it's your Canadian marriage or your Washington marriage or your Illinois civil union or your Tasmanian registered domestic partnership that's going to be the one that is helpful when you need it? If you go someplace that lets you pay $25 and stand in front of a government official and say that you're together, do it!

    Posted by: Buster | Dec 10, 2012 4:56:14 PM

  12. Contrats to the handsome couple (and Dan you look mighty fine in a suit.) Raise a glass to the newlyweds!

    Posted by: scrufff | Dec 10, 2012 8:18:11 PM

  13. « 1 2

Post a comment


« «News: Sean Avery, 'Family Guy,' Retirement, Jenni Rivera« «