Despite the ruling, marriage-equality advocates vowed to press on, possibly taking the issue to the voters again in the next few years.

“Today’s ruling is a huge blow to Americans everywhere who care about equality. The court has allowed a bare majority of voters to write same-sex couples out of basic constitutional protections,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “This ruling couldn’t be more out of step with what’s happening across the country. We have no choice but to return this basic question of fairness for the estimated 1 million LGBT Californians back to the voters.”

The Log Cabin Republicans also vowed to continue working with California’s Republican elected officials to ensure marriage equality in that state.

“While we were defeated in this ballot initiative, our cause is right and just,” said Leonard M. Lanzi, president of California Log Cabin Republicans “We will continue to work with our allies in the Republican Party and across the political spectrum in California to educate voters that marriage equality is truly a conservative value, along the lines of strengthening individual freedoms, limiting the role of government in our daily lives and preserving personal responsibility.”

The Mormon Church, which spent millions of out-of-state funds to pass Prop 8, released a statement today, as well:

“Today’s decision by the California Supreme Court is welcome. The issue the court decided was whether California citizens validly exercised their right to amend their own constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. The court has overwhelmingly affirmed their action.

“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recognizes the deeply held feelings on both sides, but strongly affirms its belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman. The bedrock institution of marriage between a man and a woman has profound implications for our society.”

Photo: Tony Webster

Listeners waiting to hear the reasoned arguments of “angry gay-rights activists” during an extended National Public Radio (NPR) report this morning on California’s new ban on same-sex marriage … are … still … waiting. After an interview with San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom (whose position against Proposition 8 could be discounted for being entwined with his clearly expressed political ambitions), Morning Edition reporter Karen Grigsby Bates gave over national airtime exclusively to Proposition 8 backers who she presented in only the most glowing terms. (Gay-rights voices were limited to a couple sound-bite chants and quick-take gripes.) The Stranger’s Dan Savage details NPR’s lapse, including contact info for complaints.

As many as 10 same-sex couples plan to file a lawsuit soon against the state of Minnesota for the right to marry. It’s a controversial move, one that some in the gay and lesbian community think is ill-timed, but those couples who are putting their money on the line — and their lives under a microscope — say the time is always right to fight for equality.

I sat down with Doug Benson, founder of Marry Me Minnesota, a nonprofit group that formed last year and is helping organize the lawsuit. Benson and his partner are also part of the planned suit.

Birkey: Why did you decide to sue the state of Minnesota?

Benson: My civil rights are being violated by the state of Minnesota. The injustice of our state government denying thousands of same-gender families across this state their constitutional right to the security, advantages and responsibilities associated with legal marriage cries out for a court challenge. The state has no compelling or even rational interest in denying this right, dividing Minnesotans into those with rights and those without. We should all have the same rights. The courts can put an end to the injustice in short order, and as citizens it is our right and our responsibility to petition the courts to do that.

Duane and I first tried to get legally married in our hometown of Duluth 16 years ago. We continue to see the need to challenge the state’s discriminatory marriage laws. Last year we had a discussion with two other couples we are friends with who had expressed a strong desire to sue the state for marriage rights. We believed that a group of litigants consisting of three couples, one with children, would present a strong case and we decided to seek counsel.

Birkey: How will the lawsuit work?

Benson: This is how I understand it: The case will be filed in District Court [in the coming months]. There will be a trial and a judgment. That judgment will most likely be appealed by either side. It will be heard by the Appeals Court, and a judgment will be rendered. That judgment will most likely be appealed by either side to the [Minnesota] Supreme Court. The Supreme Court may or may not hear the case, but if they do, the Supreme Court justices are not there to enforce their ideology or prejudices. They are charged with upholding the principles of the Constitution. If they do that, regardless of who appointed them, we will win.

One aspect of Marry Me Minnesota’s lawsuit against the state will be to challenge the state’s DOMA [Defense of Marriage Act] law, which was passed in 1997. This law, among other things, prohibits the state from recognizing same-gender marriages obtained in other jurisdictions. Overturning this law would make it possible to have our out-of-state marriages recognized as legal here in Minnesota.

And, the DOMA law has a problem. It was passed by the Legislature in the same manner that the state’s recent “concealed carry” gun law was passed. That law was overturned by the Minnesota Supreme Court because of the manner in which the bill was passed [by being attached as a rider instead of a stand-alone bill].

Our law firm, Mansfield, Tanick and Cohen, is the law firm that brought that case against the concealed-carry gun law and won. They will take their experience and expertise in winning that lawsuit and apply it to our case against the state’s DOMA law.

We meet with the law firm this week to chart the course.

Birkey: Is a legal challenge necessary? Could marriage equality be sought through the Legislature?

Benson: It needs to be done in both places so the two avenues of redress work synergistically. It worked in California and it can work here. Unfortunately for California, they also have initiative and referendum. We don’t.

Birkey: How did you personally feel about the passing of Prop 8, the voter initiative in California that took away marriage rights for gays and lesbians?

Benson: Disgusted and actually the same thing I have felt for any of these anti-gay referenda … dismay that the rights of a minority have been put to a popular vote in the first place. The courts really need to step in and stop that practice. Allowing voters to decide on whether or not their neighbors will have the same rights as they do is just crazy.

Birkey: What types of couples have expressed interest?

Benson: We have couples both male and female, younger and older, with and without children, legally married in other jurisdictions and not. One couple just celebrated their 35th year together!

Birkey: Have you encountered any resistance from members of the LGBT community, or are community members nervous about your strategy?

Benson: Sixteen years ago the establishment activists in the metro [area] were saying it isn’t the right time to fight for our rights in court. They’re still saying the same thing. There hasn’t been an identifiable advance in gay rights in this state during that period. That fact, plus wide spread discontent over the lack of progress, bolsters our resolve to move forward with the suit, with or without the blessing of establishment organizations.

As citizens, we have to fight even though we may not be assured of victory. We have to believe we can win. If everyone waited for an absolute guarantee of success before they tried to change things, nothing would ever happen. The truth is, we don’t know what the outcome of this suit will be, and neither does anyone else, no matter how much they may profess to be able to predict the future. We could win it all or have a partial victory or be turned away. Whatever happens, it will advance the cause of marriage equality in Minnesota by showing our opponents and supporters alike that we’re willing to fight for our rights and our families with all means available.

Birkey: How would you respond to religious right folks who criticize using the courts to seek equality?

Benson: The courts exist to protect the rights of individuals. The instant the religionists perceive any bias directed at them, they’re in court.

Birkey: Do you think you will see marriage equality in your lifetime?

Benson: Yes … and soon, in the courts or the Legislature. It’s coming.

The signers of the ad, a cadre of religious-right figures calling themselves No Mob Veto, said, “beginning today, we commit ourselves to opposing and publicly shaming anyone who resorts to the rhetoric of anti-religious bigotry.”

Sporadic skirmishes have arisen since the passage of Proposition 8, a California initiative that rescinded the right for same-sex couples to marry in that state. Someone sent an envelope containing white powder to Mormon temples in California and Utah recently — owing to the church’s investment in supporting the measure — and a school board member punched and kicked a gay man in Bakersfield, Calif., during a Prop 8 protest in October.

And the ad has touched off another round of heated rhetoric by both sides.

“Several signatories to the ad are generals in the culture wars,” said Rev. Susan Russell of All Saints [Epsicopal] Church in Pasadena, Calif. Russell works on religious issues with the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), an LGBT group that opposed Prop 8.

“They lied about gay people in the campaign, and now they are lying again when they say we are in favor of mob intimidation and violence,” she said.

The No Mob Veto ad vows to shame anyone who resorts to anti-religious bigotry — and the ad’s signers know something about anti-religious bigotry: Many have engaged in it themselves.

Click to view the ad in a new window.

“Mormonism either affirms historic Christianity, or it doesn’t. Since it doesn’t, it can’t call itself Christianity — a fact that all the good will and public relations in Utah can’t change,” wrote Chuck Colson, a central Watergate figure who, after being “born again” as a Christian, started the Prison Fellowship Ministries.

Colson is a signer of the No Mob Vote ad. He also told The Washington Monthly in 2005, “While Mormons share some beliefs with Christians, they are not Christians.”

On Muslims, Colson told ABCNews in 2007, “Islam is a vicious evil.”

Meanwhile, National Association of Evangelicals lobbyist Rich Cizik, another signer of the ad, spoke for the majority of evangelicals on Mitt Romney’s chances as a Mormon presidential candidate. “Most evangelicals still regard Mormonism as a cult,” he told Washington Monthly in 2005. “That will shape, I’d imagine, their reactions to Romney as a candidate for the White House.”

Signer William Donahue of the Catholic League also has a laundry list of controversial statements to his credit.

“Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It’s not a secret, OK? And I’m not afraid to say it,” he told MSNBC when asked about opposition to Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ. “That’s why they hate this movie. It’s about Jesus Christ, and it’s about truth. It’s about the Messiah.”

Donahue also went after President Bush in 2005 for allowing the White House to hand out holiday cards that didn’t specifically reference Christmas. “The Bush administration has suffered a loss of will and … they have capitulated to the worst elements in our culture,” he said, according to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).

He has also gone after Sen. Charles Schumer, folk singer Joan Osborne for her God-inspired song “One of Us,” ABC drama Nothing Sacred, indie filmmaker Kevin Smith, alt-rocker Marilyn Manson, the fantasy film The Golden Compass, conservative radio host Michael Savage, comedian Kathy Griffin, CBS’ prime-time series “CSI: Crime Scene Investigations” and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee.

Donahue blamed gays for the sexual abuse scandals plaguing the Catholic Church. The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation said in 2005, “Since 2002, Donahue has continued to opportunistically exploit the crisis in the Catholic Church to link adult homosexuality (and gay people in general) with child sexual abuse — ignoring the fact that such abuse of power is not reflective of any healthy adult sexual orientation — gay or straight.”

Not all religious leaders agree with the latest religious tactic to paint themselves as persecuted.

Bishop John Selders of Amistad United Church of Christ in Hartford, Conn., commented in an HRC press release Monday, “As an African-American, I’ve heard this before. A few frustrated members of a minority group respond in anger to a new indignity and the oppressor calls them anarchists,” he said.

“Satan, sometimes called the Father of Lies, is at work when powerful people seek to dehumanize those who are less powerful.”

Rev. Russell agreed. “Many of the leaders cited in this ad preach hate against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, then look the other way when LGBT people are the victims of hate crimes,” she said. “This ad is an act of individual and corporate hypocrisy.”

“We are all for a boycott if that is what brings about a sense of community for people,” said Sean Hetherington of West Hollywood, Calif. Hetherington dreamed up the idea as a protest to the passage of California’s Prop 8. “You can take away from the economy and give back in other ways,” he told the Associated Press.

Hetherington’s website has serves as a portal for the event, connecting participants to volunteer organizations. For those that live in the 30 states where it is still legal to fire someone just for being gay or lesbian, the website offers other ways to get involved without risking employment.

In Minnesota, some of the opportunities to get involved include the following:

The Hub Bike Co-op will be hosting free classes in honor of the event. The University of Minnesota Human Rights Center is looking for volunteers to help run an event featuring the film A Promise to the Dead: The Exile Journey of Ariel Dorfman. Open Arms of Minnesota, a nonprofit that delivers meals to those with severe illnesses, including AIDS, has openings for drivers. Family and Children Service will be wrapping presents for those in need and Avenues for Homeless Youth need assistance cleaning and painting the shelter.