Tony Perkins and Evan Wolfson Debate Maine Marriage Vote

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and Evan Wolfson of Freedom to Marry joined Anderson Cooper last night to discuss the marriage defeat in Maine.

WOLFSON: Well, what happened is it's very difficult for a minority to persuade a majority to stop discriminating. And we came very close to persuading people in Maine to uphold the freedom to marry but didn't reach everybody in particularly the more rural corners of the state with the conversations, with the personal stories, with the making it real that we need to do in order to move hearts and minds. And we need to keep doing that work.

PERKINS: Well, this is unique, Anderson. This was the 31st state where voters have had the chance, they have stood for traditional marriage. But what's different here is you had a legislature that had special interest money come in, make some moves in the legislature. The legislature then created same-sex marriage. The first time we've had a legislature create it, followed by a vote of the people that have repudiated what the legislature did. That's very significant, because this law had been passed. It was in a completely defensive posture, they had to go out and work to overturn what the legislature had done. That's significant. And also, it's significant, because I can imagine as a former legislator what some of the conversations were in Maine today. These legislators who voted for this and in their districts, the voters went to the polls and overturned it. There's now an infrastructure there and there could be some political fallout to this.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Evan Wolfson of 'Freedom to Marry' on Upcoming Prop 8 Decision

Evan Wolfson, Executive Director of Freedom to Marry, meditates in the Huffington Post on the recent California Supreme Court hearings on Proposition 8 and the coming decision:

"Unlike right-wing opponents of equality, who denounce and seek to punish courts for doing their job, I criticize only when they flinch or fail to do it. If the Court, and if this Chief Justice, vote to uphold Prop 8's damaging blow to American constitutional principles, it will be a terrible mistake, failing their obligation under and to the California Constitution. If in so doing, they compound that mistake by selling short, or sidling away from, the truths set forth so powerfully in Chief Justice George's 2008 ruling — the fundamental nature of the freedom to marry, the way in which exclusion from marriage itself denies equality and imposes the stigma of second-class citizenship — they will do a powerful disservice to the people, to the Constitution, and to history, which for the moment still ranks them alongside the judges who struck down race discrimination and the subordination of women in marriage in the face of the passions of the moment, and were vindicated. Failure of judgment and duty now will tarnish their own legacy, wreak real harm on gay people and their loved ones, and shatter the faith of millions in the courts and their legitimate and crucial role in our constitutional system."

Will the California Supreme Court Strike Down Prop 8, or "Willy-Nilly Disregard" Its Duty? [huffington post]

Evan Wolfson on the Biden-Palin Debate and the Freedom to Marry

This message regarding last night's debate between Senator Joe Biden and Governor Sarah Palin arrived in our mailbox from Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom To Marry, the gay and non-gay partnership working to win marriage equality nationwide. I'm happy to republish it here.

As I've noted to some colleagues and reporters, analyzing last night's exchange on same-sex couples and marriage:

The good news is that Senator Biden expressed his belief that gay and non-gay couples should be treated equally under the law, and committed to support for the incidents of marriage, the legal protections and responsibilities that come with marriage. The bad news is that he stopped short of supporting actual equality through the freedom to marry itself, the only way to provide the full security, clarity, and protections that marriage alone brings, and failed (as did the moderator) to point out the inconsistencies and falsehoods in Governor Palin's answer. His comments garbled the distinction between religious rites of marriage, properly left to religions to decide, and the legal right to marry, regulated by the government, which should not discriminate. Supporters of gay equality should not be using the anti-gay forces' false talking-point (introduced by Governor Palin) that ending gay couples' exclusion from marriage is "redefining" marriage; marriage is not "defined" by who is denied it.

Continued, AFTER THE JUMP...