Three cheers for the Nutmeg State, which begins issuing marriage licenses today while the rest of the nation argues over California passing Proposition 8. The Hartford Courant, which doesn't usually get a chance to crow at length about the state, leads with a feature whose theme is, "Oh, right, that same-sex marriage thing is happening. Yeah, it's no big deal for us. We don't know what the hell is wrong with the rest of you people." For example:

"They could do what they want to do," said Karen Dowdell, a 61-year-old Hartford resident who was shopping at Corbins Corner in West Hartford Tuesday morning. "I could care less."

"I don't think it's a big deal," said Robert San Angelo, 57, of Naugatuck. He supports same-sex marriage, but when asked if it is a significant issue, he shook his head and said, "I think the economy is a lot more important."

The best quote however, comes from Rep.Michael Lawlor:

CONTINUED »

Good news for all your queer Connecticut love birds!

Now that the state's Supreme Court has given the green light to gay marriage, lawyers and their ilk are making all the preparations necessary to getting same-sex nuptials up and running:

A lawyer involved in the case say paperwork will delay any actual ceremonies until next month.

Bennett Klein says while people are excited to get married and want to do it as soon as possible, Connecticut needs new license forms that reflect the decision.

Klein is an attorney with the Boston-based group that sued the state on behalf of Connecticut same-sex couples.

Tuesday's official publication of the high court's decision sends the case back to New Haven Superior Court.

The Superior Court is to issue orders to town clerks and public health departments that give them the go-ahead to distribute marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Yeah, a month may seem like a long time, but just think of how long we've waited. What's another few weeks going to hurt? This gives you time to beef up your registry! Update: State officials are saying nuptials could start as soon as November 10th. Hoorah!

(This is all assuming, of course, that Connecticut's conservatives don't vote on a Constitutional Convention and screw the whole thing…)

Connecticut's Supreme Court struck a blow to civil unions this month.

Activists and politicians have long decried the "separate, but equal" institution, but the Connecticut decision put unions' deficiency in stark relief, concluding, "…Because the institution of marriage carries it it a status and significance that the newly crated classification of civil unions does not embody, the segregation of heterosexual and homosexual couples into separate institutions constitutes a cognizable harm."

With that ruling, Vermont's progressive leaders are looking to break their own "civil" bonds.

That state passed civil unions eight years ago, when the political climate was far more foreboding, but are feeling rejuvenated and ready to roar into the future to institute gay marriage there:

"I feel the landscape has changed, especially from eight years ago," said Rep. Mark Larson, D-Burlington, who was the lead sponsor of a gay marriage bill during the last legislative session. "I don't think we'll see the divisiveness that we saw before. Vermont has come a long way since then."

With more than two months before the start of the new legislative session and an election coming next month, advocates and lawmakers were mum on who might be major players in this discussion and what the main strategy to pass such a bill would look like.

"I haven't been talking strategy with anyone yet," said Rep. Jason Lorber, D-Burlington, a co-sponsor of Larson's gay marriage bill. "But I expect it will come up next year and I certainly hope that we pass it."

The big difference between Vermont and Connecticut - and, in fact, California and Massachusetts - could be that lawmakers take the reins on this one, rather than leaving it to the court. If that happens, the state would be the first to legislatively pass gay marriage, thus poking holes in that tired, old "activist judges" argument the right likes so much.

Here's something you'll find totally unsurprising.

Connecticut's social conservatives announced plans to reverse the state Supreme Court's ruling that the state must allow gay marriages. And, to that end, they will urge voters to support a constitutional convention, an event that come around every 20 years. The court's "robed masters" must be stopped, says the Family Institute of Connecticut's Peter Wolfgang, seen here in an ill-fitting suit.:

"The Court's willingness to undemocratically impose same-sex marriage on Connecticut has made it necessary for us to demand the right to Let the People Decide," said [Wolfgang].

"And that is why thousands of us will vote 'yes' for a constitutional convention on November 4th," he said.
…
"We will work for a majority 'yes' vote this November 4th to hold a state constitutional convention and will fight to get a direct initiative law out of the convention," Wolfgang said.

"And then we will put a question on the ballot to allow the public - not our robed masters - to decide once and for all if marriage will be protected in our state constitution as the union of a man and a woman," he continued.

Wolfgang's not the only one speaking out against the same-sex decision. Supreme conservative leader James Dobson this weekend described the ruling as "another tragic example of runaway judges trampling on citizens' right to decide public policy for themselves." And the award for drama queen goes to…

Gavin Newsom, the San Francisco lawyer who began issuing gay marriage licenses way back in 2004, released a statement today celebrating the same-sex nuptials ruling Connecticut:

Today, the Connecticut Supreme Court took an historic step by joining California and Massachusetts in the fight to provide marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples. The Court’s decision to overturn Connecticut’s ban on equal marriage rights indicates that all across the country, communities are reaching the conclusion that separate is not equal, and that we should not harm our friends, neighbors and coworkers by denying them equal treatment under the law.

Our task now is to protect marriage equality at the ballot box in California by voting No on Proposition 8.

Newsom's words couldn't be more important - we're sure California's right will use the Connecticut decision to scare up more supporters.

Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell ain't happy about today's gay marriage win. The politico, who in 2005 signed civil unions into law, today released a statement decrying the state Supreme Court's decision, which said civil unions were unconstitutional:

I disagree with today's State Supreme Court ruling but as governor, I will uphold it. I continue to believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman.

I also believe that the historic civil union law that I proudly signed in 2005 is equitable and just. We were the first state to enact such a law through legislative action and not a court mandate.

Though she doesn't approve - and says the ruling doesn't "reflect" her constituents' views - Rell made clear that she will not support any efforts to reverse the ruling. She also thinks any fight would fail, which is good to hear.

Hoorah! The Connecticut Supreme Court today ruled 4-3 that the state's ban on gay marriage violates its constitution.

The decision came after eight gay citizens filed a lawsuit claiming civil unions were not the same as marriage and qualified as discrimination. And the Court agreed, as Justice Richard Palmer writes in the majority opinion:

We conclude that, in light of the history of pernicious discrimination faced by gay men and lesbians, and because the institution of marriage carries it it a status and significance that the newly crated classification of civil unions does not embody, the segregation of heterosexual and homosexual couples into separate institutions constitutes a cognizable harm. We also conclude that our state scheme discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, for the same reasons that classifications predicated on gender are considered quasi-suspect for the purposes of the equal protection provisions of the United States constitutions…
…
The state has failed to provide sufficient justification for excluding same sex couples from the institution of marriage.

This is good news for those of you in New York and New Jersey, because you don't have to be a Connecticut resident to marry there.

Here's the PDF of the ruling.