Given a green light, same-sex R.I. couples plan Mass. weddings
Same-sex couples in Rhode Island, eager to take advantage of a Suffolk Superior Court judge's ruling last week that found their state does not prohibit gay marriage, began making plans this weekend to marry in Massachusetts.
The ruling was the first to allow same-sex couples from outside Massachusetts to marry since the Supreme Judicial Court's 2003 ruling that legalized gay marriages in the state. In March, the SJC ruled the state could use a 1913 law to stop out-of-state couples from marrying here if the marriage was forbidden in their home state.
In Rhode Island, where the law refers to a bride and groom but does not explicitly prohibit gay marriage, same-sex couples said yesterday that they hoped to marry soon -- before the state's General Assembly has the chance to change the law when it meets again in January.
``As we all know, anything can happen, and it's fair to say that we're paranoid," said Judy McDonnell , 50, a sociologist from Providence who has started making plans to marry her partner of 13 years. ``We're hoping there won't be any more obstacles. But we feel urgency, because we can't know for sure."
McDonnell and her partner hope to join their friends Wendy Becker , 45, and Mary Norton , 46, both of Providence, whose two-year-old lawsuit prompted the judge's ruling Friday to allow same-sex couples from Rhode Island to marry in Massachusetts. Becker and Norton, together for 19 years, said they plan to apply this week for a marriage license in Attleboro.
But the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders in Boston has advised same-sex couples to allow some time for city and town clerks to implement the judge's ruling. Since May 2004, when the state first began allowing gay marriage, about 8,500 same-sex couples have married, according to the group.
``Folks should call the clerk's office to make sure they're ready to start issuing licenses," said Carisa Cunningham , a spokeswoman for the group. ``There isn't any legal reason that couples from Rhode Island can't come up and get married. It may be just administrative holdups."
That may change. Rhode Island's attorney general, Patrick C. Lynch, said last week that the ruling ``does not mean that Rhode Island will recognize a same-sex marriage performed in Massachusetts." He added that the state would not recognize one until authorized by a local court or the General Assembly.
But opponents of same-sex marriage, including the Diocese of Providence , are hoping the ruling will spur Rhode Island to pass a law defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman. ``This ruling has create d a legal fiction," said the Rev. Bernard A. Healey , director of the diocese's office of governmental liaison. ``This is a wake-up call that we need to be more vigilant in promoting and protecting traditional marriage. Maybe this will help some people sitting on the fence."
The Massachusetts Family Institute in Newton had this message yesterday for same-sex couples from Rhode Island: Stay home. ``Why should Rhode Island be brought into this arena because of Massachusetts' peculiarities?" said Kris Mineau , president of the institute. ``It is certainly my hope that couples will not seek Massachusetts marriage licenses just to go back to create political and legal furor in Rhode Island."
Scott Simmons , 38, a painter from Johnston, said neither pressure nor legal ambiguities would dissuade him and his partner for the past 14 years.
``We're very excited," Simmons said. ``It's nice that we're starting to be accepted as regular citizens, that we can finally expect equal treatment."
For Andrew Snyder and Robert Waters , who were married in Canada over the summer after 10 years together, getting married in the States, close to home, is an opportunity they do not want to pass up. ``Since it's been such a difficult road, we've always joked that we'll get married wherever they'll let us," said Snyder, 38, a pediatrician from Warwick. ``We see this decision as wonderful news, but we understand it's not over yet."
Marianne Monte said she has bought dresses for so many friends' weddings that it is only fair that they now return the favor. She and her partner of nine years have started an invitation list. ``We would like to do it as soon as is reasonably practical," said Monte, 37, a human resources director at a bank in Providence. ``The law's acknowledging us as a couple through the institution of marriage is incredibly important to us. We've called friends and family, saying we're getting married. We're looking for payback for all those wedding gifts we've passed along."
David Abel can be reached at dabel@globe.com. 