NC legislators considering outright gay marriage ban

Thomas Landreth hadn’t really imagined his wedding in a Swedish ice hotel.

His friends and family weren’t on the guest list; in fact, most of the guests were people he had met only a week before. He hadn’t decided the date or location — he won the wedding in a Scandinavian Airlines contest. But the ceremony was beautiful, the commitment to his spouse genuine, and that’s all that mattered to him.

Except his marriage wasn’t real, at least not in the eyes of North Carolina. Landreth was marrying his college sweetheart, Brett Kessler, and gay marriage is not recognized in the state.

North Carolina does not recognize same-sex marriages under the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. A proposed amendment seeks to add that definition to the state’s constitution, which could make it more difficult for judges and future legislators to overturn.

The amendment could be put up for referendum in the 2012 elections, but it must first be passed in the legislative session starting Sept. 12.

Six states issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, including New York, which recently overturned its ban. The District of Columbia also recognizes same-sex marriage.

As it has with other states, the American Civil Liberties Union has opposed North Carolina’s proposal, saying it would write discrimination into the constitution.

“It denies gay couples the opportunity to stand up in front of their friends, their family and their community and show their commitment to each other like straight couples can,” said Sarah Preston, policy director for ACLU-North Carolina.

Republican legislators who support the amendment say it would prevent activist judges from overturning the marriage law already in place.

“We’ve seen across the country one judge overturning the will of the legislature and, in some cases, the will of the people,” said N.C. Rep. Dale Folwell, R-Forsyth. “This decision is bigger than one judge or 170 legislators.”

This is not the state’s first time to consider such a bill — the issue also came before the General Assembly in 2007 and 2009. Most other Southern states have passed similar amendments.

Landreth knew his marriage in December wouldn’t be legal here.

“It was more symbolic than anything,” he said.

The couple will not have many of the benefits of marriage, including health benefits afforded to straight married couples. A straight couple has visitation rights and the right to make medical decisions on behalf of his or her spouse; Landreth does not. And Kessler’s care for him when he was sick is what brought them together in the first place, more than three years ago.

“We had been dating on and off, but our commitment to each other was cheesy and pathetic,” he said. “He got me sick and then took care of me for that entire week, and then we decided, ‘Hey, we like each other.’”

They entered the wedding contest along with more than 40 other same-sex couples last year. In October, they learned they had won a December wedding in Sweden.

The distance wasn’t an issue, even though friends and family couldn’t attend, because traveling would have been an obstacle anywhere they could have had the ceremony.

“Ours would have been a destination wedding by default,” Landreth said.

Landreth said the measure would hold symbolic weight if it passed, even if it wouldn’t change anything in practice.

“At some basic level, it’s just a constant reminder that you’re not of value to the state. It feels like we’re playing marriage or some inferior version of what the government recognizes as right,” he said. “A part of me still thinks of us as engaged.”

But while trying to work toward getting a place of their own, Landreth said his income is much more important than his legal marital status.

“Ultimately, I need money a lot more than I need to be recognized as married at 23 years old,” he said. “But it would be nice to have that happen.”

Contact the State & National Editor at state@dailytarheel.com.