> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Far-reaching equality bill means gays will have to commit
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/far-reaching-equality-bill-means-gays-will-have-to-commit/
- Published: 2003-09-23T15:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-25T01:02:30.000Z
- Author: David Pisarra
- Tags: Opinion, Santa Monica, #archive-import

I was sitting at my desk last Friday chatting with my boyfriend about our hectic weekend plans. In the midst of our conversation he excitedly declares, “Wow, The Advocate is reporting that Davis signed the DP Bill.” And with the flourish of the governor’s pen, an entire class of people are now eligible to share in the joys and benefits of a long-term committed relationship, and the tortures and agony of divorce.

AB 205, which was authored by Assembly Member Jackie Goldberg and coauthored by a host of other Assembly members, is called “The California Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act of 2003.” This is a comprehensive bill that extends far ranging rights and responsibilities to people who are in a registered Domestic Partnership.

The law won’t go into effect for the next 15 months. The reasons for the delay are many, but partly so current domestic partners may choose to opt out of the new and improved version. The bill requires the Secretary of State to send three letters to current partnerships informing them of the changes to their rights and responsibilities, as well as give them an opportunity to terminate their partnership.

This new legislation provides that the state of California, its courts, agencies and policies must now treat the domestic partners with the same respect as those who are “legally married.” The actual language used is quite bland, “Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.”

The good news is that registered domestic partners now have the ability to inherit automatically. They have the right to see their spouses in the hospital, to make funeral arrangements, to be guaranteed that their homes are safe and not going to be taken away by the long lost relatives of their life partners.

Domestic partners will be able to more easily adopt the children of spouses, or the hundreds of thousands of orphans in the state. Domestic partners will have the protections of “spousal privilege” that is afforded a married couple who is being sued.

Domestic partners also get to file their state taxes jointly if they choose, but their federal taxes still have to be filed separately, which is good for the deductions. This, by the way, is probably what is most likely to provoke the House and Senate to change their tunes. They’ll approve of gay marriages just as soon as they can figure out how to tax us more.

The bad news is that domestic partners now have the joys of spousal support to look forward to, community property issues, child support and debts incurred by partners can now be joint — a fact I am sure the credit card companies will enthusiastically welcome.

The law has an equal protection clause in it, which means that the state of California will treat domestic partners the same as it does traditional married couples. If there is a federal law that would require California to treat married couples differently than domestic partners, California must now treat them the same under AB205.

This is the proverbial camel’s nose under the tent. The Legislature has created a legal launching pad from which gay and lesbian couples, and other qualified domestic partners, may challenge their treatment on a national level. Thanks to the “Full Faith and Credit” clause of the U.S. Constitution, we are sure to see a challenge to federal laws within a month of the official start of the new law.

This is not the end of the road. This is not “marriage,” but it is very close. The gay community has come far and this is a major step towards legitimacy.

And yet I can’t help but wonder about it all. My personal reaction is confusion. I never had to really think about what marriage would mean to me, not really. I guess I always assumed that I’d meet Mr. Wonderful, we’d buy a house, get a dog, and the mantle of responsibility and respectability would always fall just a little short.

The world is changing, sometimes faster than I can keep up with. We’re getting equality, legitimacy and respect. I’ve been asked to be on an advisory board to the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. I didn’t even know we had one.

Less than 90 days ago, we were still outlaws in many states in this country, but Lawrence vs. Texas changed how courts and the police must view the gay and lesbian community, at least legally. Sadly, U.S. Customs still has a problem with Canadian couples — they denied access to two men who are legally married in Canada, saying they couldn’t come in as a “family.” The irony of this is that a question among gays to find out whether or not someone is gay is “Are they family?” But I’m sure that will change too.

Society is changing so fast we don’t even have the language to keep up with the changes. What am I? My boyfriend is my boyfriend, but if we exchange rings are we fiancés? Then what? Do we get married or domesticated? Marriage sounds OK, but is legally incorrect. Domesticated sounds like we’re pets. And what do we call each other? Husband sounds horrendously like we’re trying to mimic some heterosexual paradigm and frankly I’m no Donna Reed. Life partner? Pretentious. Just partner? That’s a business term and I have a couple of those.

We bought a couch together on Sunday. Everyone who dealt with us recognized us as a couple. At our gym, we are recognized and respected as a couple. It’s overwhelming in some ways and yet it’s exactly what I wanted. I feel empowered and scared. Scared that we’ll get “domestic partnered,” and that I’ll have to go through a divorce. I didn’t have to think about that last week.

I am reminded of the difference between being involved and being committed. It is much like the difference between bacon and eggs. The chicken is involved, the pig is committed. Used to be that domestic partners were involved, now they get to be committed. (David Pisarra is a partner in the Santa Monica law firm of Pisarra & Grist, he welcomes questions, and (310) 664-9969 or e-mailed at DPISAR-)

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on September 23, 2003.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/092303.pdf?ref=smdp.com)