Civil Wars: A Battle for Gay Marriage (Hardcover)

~ (Author) "BETH ROBINSON did not expect the call to come that Monday, but at 10:55 A.M. on December 20, 1999, the court clerk was on the..." (more)
Key Phrases: civil unions bill, domestic partnership bill, civil union ceremony, State House, Bill Lippert, Tom Little (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

In this gripping piece of journalistic history, Moats chronicles the battle over gay marriage in Vermont, which culminated in 2000 with the first state law allowing gay civil unions. Moats, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his editorials in the Rutland Chronicle supporting the law, brings a balanced perspective and an urgency to the judicial and legislative drama, which registers on a personal scale. His goal is to answer the following question, which he poses in the prologue: "How did such a thing happen in Vermont?" The result is a local history that remains an important contribution to the history of civil rights in the United States. Vermont itself is the hero of this book, and Moats provides a deft and believable account of how this small state - the first in the union to abolish slavery - became fertile ground for a grassroots, antihomophobic political movement. In perhaps the most moving section, Moats lets the citizens of Vermont speak for themselves. On January 25, 2000, the state legislature heard public testimony from their constituents, and Moats simply and elegantly presents some of the comments. One woman, who timidly announces that she is in a "committed, loving relationship" with another woman, relates an anecdote about her son: "Not long ago, my youngest, who's now eleven, would ask me when we, his parents, would be getting married.... He has now been exposed to the fear and hatred of the world around him and no longer asks this question. I want my children to have the respect they deserve, to have parents that are married and can fully provide for them." Despite a slight anti-urban bias (San Francisco and New York, in contrast to Vermont, stage "flamboyant, sometimes violent, coming[s] out"), Moats's account emerges as essential reading for Americans on both sides of the partisan aisle, especially since Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean figures so prominently in the story.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From The Washington Post

Jonathan Rauch's thoughtful and convincingly argued manifesto in favor of same-sex marriage could not be better timed. From San Francisco and Portland, Ore., to Asbury Park, N.J., and New Paltz, N.Y., the recent wave of locally authorized gay marriages has thrust the issue to the forefront of national politics with a greater emotional punch than last November's pro-gay ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court or President Bush's call for a federal constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages. Most if not all of those locally issued licenses may turn to dust under state legal challenge -- Oregon's are by far the most likely to survive -- but with Massachusetts ready to begin issuing legally valid same-sex licenses on May 17, gay marriage will remain in headlines for months and years to come.

Rauch's impressive book is as enthusiastic an encomium to marriage as anyone, gay or straight, could write. Identifying himself as "a true believer in the special importance and unique qualities of the institution of marriage," he declares that marriage is "the great civilizing institution" and "the most fundamental institution of society." Reasoning that "two people's lifelong commitment. . . to care for each other" defines the essential core of marriage, he concludes that the key social purpose of marriage is "to bond as many people as possible into committed, stable relationships." Indeed, he says, "marriage, like democracy and capitalism, meets the personal and social needs of human beings as nothing else can."

Rauch is thus no lefty-liberal, nor is he a gay cheerleader. For gays, he says, "marriage will give us the opportunity to become better people, by bestowing upon us the full responsibilities of adulthood." Marriage, he asserts, "will ennoble and dignify gay love and sex" and make gay life "more relationship-oriented" by hastening "the decline of the same-sex underworld." Declaring that "much of what is unique about gay culture . . . is an artifact of marginalization and infantilization," he predicts that "marriage will change homosexual culture more than homosexual culture will change marriage."

Gay Marriage is unfailingly polite and respectful toward opponents, notwithstanding many foes' proclivity for overheated warnings about how same-sex marriages will mean "losing American civilization." Yet Rauch astutely notes how "peculiar" it is that adversaries energetically denounce "the 'homosexual lifestyle' -- meaning, to a large extent, the gay sexual underworld -- while fighting tooth and nail against letting gays participate in the institution which would do the most to change that lifestyle." Rauch is too courteous to observe that this discrepancy suggests that a racist-like loathing of gay people as innately inferior, rather than just a desire to "defend" marriage, may motivate many outspoken opponents.

The immediate precursor to last year's successful gay-marriage case in Massachusetts was a similar lawsuit in Vermont. There, in late 1999, the state supreme court likewise found that the exclusion of same-sex couples from the rights and benefits of marriage violated the state constitution. But unlike the Massachusetts court, which held that "marriage" itself must be made accessible to gays, the Vermont court asked the state legislature to eliminate the legal inequalities. That ruling was a gay rights landmark, but it was also a rejection of the gay plaintiffs' claim that "the status of marriage is in and of itself a value, a benefit."

Civil Wars, by David Moats, the editorial page editor of the Rutland Herald, recounts the "political, social, and cultural war" that took place in Vermont during 2000. Moats won a Pulitzer Prize for his editorials on the issue, and Civil Wars tells a compelling, emotionally moving story. Moats viewed the Vermont conflict as "the latest tumultuous chapter in a decades-long struggle for civil rights in America," and he compares it to "Birmingham and Selma as landmarks of our growth toward a more complete democracy." Just as in Alabama four decades ago, Moats stresses, hateful behavior by civil rights opponents proved decisive in "touching the conscience" of Vermonters who did not start out as gay rights supporters.

When the political hot potato of gay marriage first landed in the Vermont legislature, the House Judiciary Committee had the task of drafting a bill that would comply with the court's ruling. The committee's membership ranged from savvy Burlington lawyers to a pair of retired state troopers, but it also included the one openly gay member of the legislature, Democrat Bill Lippert. The committee held hearings and convened two evening forums, at which both proponents and opponents of gay marriage spoke fervently. By the time the hearings ended, Moats reports, "many of the committee members had concluded that marriage was the right thing to do but that it would be impossible to win passage for a marriage bill in the House." Vermont Gov. Howard Dean concurred in the judgment that domestic partnership legislation was the only politically feasible option. During one committee session the term "civil union" was suggested as a preferable label, and "once the committee members happened on that phrase, they knew it was right." But the committee's decision to endorse civil unions, while politically courageous for many members, was nonetheless "a galling compromise" for gay marriage proponents who sought the form, as well as the substance, of civil marriage.

When the civil unions bill reached the House floor, Bill Lippert spoke passionately in support. "Tears were brimming in the eyes of onlookers, including me," Moats recalls. When Lippert finished, 72-year-old Republican Robert Kinsey, a three-decades legislative veteran and a former Speaker, rose to tell his colleagues that "I just heard the greatest speech I've heard in thirty years." The bill passed by a five-vote margin, and Gov. Dean forcefully prodded hesitant state Senate leaders to back it as well. Foul-mouthed homophobles took over a community forum attended by one crucial undecided senator, and the effect was decisive. "The bigots of St. Albans should know we have them to thank for civil unions," another senator explained once the bill passed and was signed into law.

Civil Wars sketches many political profiles in courage, even if that courage was expended on behalf of a measure that, compared to the one in Massachusetts, is in Rauch's words but "a distant second choice." Now, gay marriage for real is just a few weeks away, but years of political warfare lie ahead, too. History's moral judgment on 1960s opponents of civil rights is indelible, and perhaps that verdict will help more politicians see their way clear toward the courage that this new struggle demands.

Reviewed by David J. Garrow

Copyright 2004, The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 304 pages
• Publisher: Harcourt; 1 edition (February 2, 2004)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 015101017X
• ISBN-13: 978-0151010172
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.4 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 4.8 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (8 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,224,113 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

21 of 21 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Another Issue Whose Time Has Come?, December 16, 2003

By	Dr. Jonathan Dolhenty (Port Orford, OR United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)

David Moats is the editorial page editor of the "Rutland Herald" who won a Pulitzer Prize for his editorials in support of gay marriage. "Civil Wars," his book on the subject, reads more like a novel in the thriller genre than a nonfictional account of the judicial and legislative battle over same-sex unions which occurred in the state of Vermont in 2000. In that year the "Green Mountain State" became the first state to grant gay and lesbian couples the right to join in civil unions. In the Prologue to his book, Moats asks the question: "How did such a thing happen in Vermont?" The rest of the book is devoted to providing an answer.

On Monday, December 20, 1999, the Vermont Supreme Court rendered its decision in a case brought before it over a year previously. It was a controversial case where the Court was being urged to establish that gay and lesbian couples had the right to marry. The opinion issued by the Court, however, was both a win and a loss for the proponents of gay marriage. While recognizing that the issue was secular rather than religious and that denying marriage to gays violated the Common Benefits Clause of the Vermont Constitution, the Court ruled that the final disposition of the matter should rest with the state legislature. In a surprising move, the Court had moved the controversy from the judicial realm to the political arena. As a result a new and even more vigorous conflict would ensue.

The narrative that unfolds has all the elements of a good drama: there is joy and sadness, there are high points and lowpoints, there are wins and losses, there are heroes, victims, and the occasional cad, whose behavior at times borders on the incomprehensible. The reader will first meet Beth Robinson, the determined attorney who argued the case before the Supreme Court, and then hear the personal stories of the plaintiffs who were courageous enough to come forward and attach their names to the legal action. The reader will also meet many members of the Vermont legislature, those that supported the move toward recognition of same-sex unions and those that opposed it. Their individual stories add a special and telling ingredient to the narrative as a whole. And, in what must be one of the most stirring parts of the book, the author lets the citizens of Vermont speak for themselves, those in favor of the change and those against it.

In my personal opinion, one of the highlights of the book occurs in Chapter Nine. It is really unrelated to the historical events which unfolded during the time the Vermont legislature was dealing with the gay marriage issue, but I think it is an enlightening sidebar to this controversial matter. Sharon Underwood, mother of a gay son, wrote an impassioned opinion piece which appeared in a local newspaper and expressed her anger, as Moats says, "about the hypocrisy and self-righteousness of those who had adopted a moral tone to condemn and attack their neighbors." In her op-ed, Ms. Underwood briefly relates some of the horrific things which happened to her son beginning at the age of six, simply because he was perceived to be "different." Her two-page story alone is worth the price of the book.

Moats is clearly aware of one of the most problematic aspects of the gay marriage issue. He points out early on that "In confronting the issue of gay marriage, the nation confronts a paradox of liberal democracy. The dignity of the individual was a moral value that rested on religious and philosophical traditions prevailing in eighteenth-century Britain and its colonies. Yet liberal democracy lifts that value into the secular realm, where it serves as the premise for equality and justice before the law."

This is an important point. Those who oppose any change in the marriage laws because of the Judeo-Christian tradition which they claim forms the foundation of our society fail to see that, while it is true that many of our moral beliefs are founded on Christian principles, our political framework and the theories underlying it are not. The political foundation of our society is firmly set on ideas derived from the secular, "pagan" cultures of ancient Greece and Rome. Our Republic must in the end be secular and inclusive, and our representative democracy must be fair and just to all citizens. And this may mean a recognition of the fundamental right to choose a marriage partner without interference from the state.

Is there anything missing in Moats' telling of the events he relates? I can think of at least two things I wished he would have explained more in detail but, in fairness to him, he may have considered them irrelevant to the issue at hand or he may have been unable to pursue them. One, I would have liked more information about the rationale of the Catholic legislators who, in apparent defiance of their bishop's directive, supported legalization of gay marriage. Secondly, I would have liked to know why Neil Randall, a Libertarian legislator, would join with Nancy Sheltra, leader of the House conservatives, to derail a domestic partnership bill and push for a constitutional amendment forbidding both gay marriage and domestic partnership. Libertarians are well-known for generally opposing state intervention in strictly personal matters. But, as any student of politics knows, politics makes for strange bedfellows.

In conclusion, this book is definitely not a one-sided partisan report on gay marriage. Although the author is clearly sympathetic to the legalization of gay marriage, he is eminently fair in describing both sides of the issue and in his evaluation of the characters on both sides of the matter. I would recommend his book to all those interested in a fair and balanced discussion of same-sex unions, regardless of the side one currently takes on this very divisive issue, which is sure to claim the attention of the public for some time to come.

11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars There Are Many Heroes Here, April 8, 2004

By	H. F. Corbin "Foster Corbin" (ATLANTA, GA USA) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

Amazon Verified Purchase

David Moats is the editorial page editor of the RUTLAND HERALD and the winner of a Pulitzer for his editorials in support of same-sex unions. This book grew out of Mr. Moats' interest in the whole gay marriage debate and the events that preceded the passage in Vermont of the historical civil union legislation. In this extremely well-written account, Mr. Moats covers all the major events that set the stage for this kind of history to be made in Vermont, that is, the three couples being brave enough to bring suit, the ruling of the Vermont Supreme Court and the ultimate passage into law of civil unions for gay people. He discusses the Stonewall riots, the murder of Harvey Milk, the AIDS epidemic, gays in the military, the lawsuit brought in Hawaii, the increase of adoptions by gay and lesbian couples, and the Matthew Shephard murder. He says in the prologue: In my view, the Vermont story ranks, not just with the Stonewall riots and the murder of Harvey Milk as landmarks of gay history, but with Birmingham and Selma as landmarks of our growth toward a more complete democracy."

Governor Howard Dean showed tremendous courage in signing the civil union bill into law. He conducted himself here as he did when he later ran for the Democratic nomination for president. He was open and frank about doing the right thing. There are many other heroes here, Mr. Moates for starters, who is not gay. Certainly the three couples who brought the lawsuit, their attorneys and other gay people in Vermont were brave beyond measure. There were also many fine and decent people in both houses of state government, who were determined to do the right thing by gay people and in so doing, several of them later lost their seats in the state legislature. Two individuals stand out for me--Bill Lippert, vice chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Bob Kinsey, a 72 year-old Republican in the House, an elder in the Presbyterian Church where he and his wife had sung in the choir for fifty-two years. Initially he was opposed to any kind of gay marriage or domestic partnership bill but was persuaded to vote for the bill that eventually passed, probably in part because a teepee on his farm that he had built as a warming hut for skaters in the cold Vermont winters mysteriously burned. He believed the fire was caused by arsonists because of his stand on gay rights. "It was the human dimension of the gay marriage bill that touched him. . . He and his wife. . . had learned something about life and love and death. No one was going to instruct him about right and wrong or the disposition of his soul." Mr. Lippert, who is gay, gave an impassioned speech on the House floor that many believed brought his undecided colleagues to his side: "There's something strange about sitting in the midst of a delibertive body that is trying to decide whether I and my fellow gay and lesbian Vermonters should get our rights now. . . Don't tell me about what a committed relationship is and isn't. I've watched my gay brothers care for each other deeply and my lesbian sisters nurse and care. There is no love and no commitment any greater than what I've seen, what I know." When Mr. Lippert sat down, Robert Kinsey rose and said that he had just heard the greatest speech he had heard in his 30 years in government. There are many other instances of quiet and sometimes not so quiet heroism here. The jackals of course came out too. The infamous Phyllis Schlafly and Alan Keyes, to name two, made appearances to spread their hate as well.

Mr. Moats in the last chapter of the book discusses some of the other significant events for gays and lesbians, The United States Supreme Court's striking down the Texas sodomy law, the ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Court in favor of gay marriage as well as the decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Canada upholding a lower court's ruling granting the right for gays and lesbians to marry. This book went to press too early for Mr. Moats to include the passage last week by the Georgia House-- the Senate has passed one weeks ago-- of a bill to allow the citizens of Georgia to vote in November for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage although there is already a law on the books in Georgia making gay marriage illegal. Sad to say, Georgia is not Vermont.

11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars "We began this lawsuit because it was about family.", March 22, 2004

By	M. J Leonard "MikeonAlpha" (Silver Lake, Los Angeles, CA United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

This book profoundly affected me. This is an absolutely riveting, educational and incisive account of the battle to pass the nation's first civil union laws for gays and lesbians in Vermont. As a writer for the Rutland Herald, Moats writes with a consummate authority on the issue as he transforms his balanced and humane editorials into a book that almost reads like a work of fiction. From the outset we are introduced to the main protagonists who will play a major role in bringing the Vermont laws into being - the young hotshot lawyers who were only too well aware of the kinds of discrimination that gays faced; the young, gay man who went on to be part of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and who had for years, fought for gay rights; and the three same sex couples who requested marriage licenses in their small Vermont towns, where they basically wanted to solidify their relationship and pronounce their love for each other.

The book raises many interesting issues: The Vermont Supreme Court refused to go the whole way on gay marriage and left the logistics of the issue largely to the Vermont Legislature in the hopes that it would increase and encourage the democratic process. Instead the legislature was left in a mess, "pulled by numerous crosscurrents: their own religious beliefs, the anger of their constituents and the views of the court." Also, the Freedom to Marry Taskforce that was set up in response to the need for gays to solidify their relationships was bitterly disappointed by the ruling. They were hoping for the court's decision to be full, unequivocal marriage rights. But they felt that for society to accept the fact of gay marriage or domestic partnership, "society would have to address the issue squarely, confronting and overcoming prejudices that stood as obstacles to equal rights."

Moats does a good job of placing the fight for civil union laws and gay marriage in the context of the history of the gay rights movement. He outlines the birth of the fledgling movement with the Stonewall riots of the late sixties, he talks about Harvey Milk and his plea, in the seventies, for every gay and lesbian in America to come out, and he also talks about the emergence of fundamentalist Christian movements such as the Moral Majority, who believed that any effort by the state to "recognize the legitimacy of homosexual relationships was a violation of God's word." The book presents the argument that, in general, fundamentalists fear social modernity, and Moats goes into quite a bit of historical depth explaining how this has come about. In the latter part of the twentieth century, sexual freedom and new stresses on the family had put "sex at the center of the battle between religious fundamentalists and the modern world."

Moats also describes how the terrible murder of Mathew Shepard galvanized the country, and made the quest to seek legitimacy for same-sex relationships even more urgent. The book also provides an important lesson in how democracy, the legislature, and the courts work together, and gives an interesting account on the type of "collective bargaining" that takes place between parliamentarians when such issues are bought forward. Also interesting is how the lawyers for the plaintiffs actually argued their case before the courts - they needed to justify that the case had a "heightened scrutiny," which would in turn place a heavy burden on the state to show a compelling reason for denial of marriage rights. Civil Wars is a terrific book that gives a very balanced and often heart-felt view of the issues. Moats never shies away from describing the human cost of the struggle for gay and lesbian rights; and through this book, he is really showing the overwhelming passion and commitment of those select group of people who are now involved in the wider struggle. Mike Leonard March 04.