US gay couple in ’71 marriage case still joined

A+
A
A-

In this file photo from Jan. 11, 2010, Stuart Gaffney, left, and John Lewis, same-sex partners for 22 years, huddle outside of the federal courthouse in San Francisco. The U.S. Supreme Court decided Friday, Dec. 7, 2012, to hear the appeal of a ruling that struck down Proposition 8, the state’s measure that banned same sex marriages. The highly anticipated decision by the court means same-sex marriages will not resume in California any time soon. The justices likely will not issue a ruling until spring of next year. A federal appeals court ruled in February that Proposition 8’s ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. But the court delayed implementing the order until same-sex marriage opponents proponents could ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the ruling. (AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez)

MINNEAPOLIS – When Jack Baker proposed to Michael McConnell that they join their lives together as a couple, in March 1967, McConnell accepted with a condition that was utterly radical for its time: that someday they would legally marry.

Just a few years later, the U.S. Supreme Court slammed the door on the men’s Minnesota lawsuit to be the first same-sex couple to legally marry in the U.S. It took another 40 years for the nation’s highest court to revisit gay marriage rights, and Baker and McConnell — still together, still living in Minneapolis — are alive to see it.

On Friday, the justices decided to take a potentially historic look at gay marriage by agreeing to hear two cases that challenge official discrimination against gay Americans either by forbidding them from marrying or denying those who can marry legally the right to obtain federal benefits that are available to heterosexual married couples.

“The outcome was never in doubt because the conclusion was intuitively obvious to a first-year law student,” Baker wrote in an email to The Associated Press.

The couple, who have kept a low profile in the years since they made national headlines with their marriage pursuit, declined an interview request but responded to a few questions via email.

While Baker saw the court’s action as an obvious step, marriage between two men was nearly unthinkable to most Americans decades earlier when the couple walked into the Hennepin County courthouse in Minneapolis on May 18, 1970, and tried to get a license.

New York City’s Stonewall riots, seen now as the symbolic start to the modern gay rights movement, were less than a year in the past. Sodomy laws made gay sex illegal in nearly every state; most gay men and lesbians were concerned with much more basic rights like keeping their jobs and homes or simply living openly.

“People at the time said these guys were crazy,” said Phil Duran, legal counsel to OutFront Minnesota, the state’s principal gay rights lobby. “I think today, most people would say, ‘Holy mackerel, you saw this when no one else did.’ History will vindicate them. It already has.”

Forty years after they appeared in a “Look” magazine spread and on “The Phil Donahue Show,” Baker and McConnell have retreated from public life. The men, both 70, live in a quiet, nondescript south Minneapolis neighborhood. McConnell recently retired after a long career with the Hennepin County library system. Baker, a longtime attorney who ran unsuccessfully for Minneapolis City Council and a judgeship in the years after they pursued a marriage license, is mostly retired as well. Their case is no longer widely recalled in Minnesota, and the couple has mostly withdrawn from open activism, although the two men are working on a book about their lives.

Today, nine states have legalized gay marriage or are about to do so. The state-by-state approach adopted by gay rights groups has gathered steam, while the Supreme Court has yet to address whether the Constitution extends marriage rights to straight and gay couples alike.

The high court in October 1972 declined to hear arguments in their case, rejecting it in a one-sentence dismissal “for want of a substantial federal question.” Now, in taking up the dispute over a California constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, the court may confront the issue of whether the U.S. Constitution forbids states from defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

According to an unpublished book about their case by Ken Bronson, a Chicago-based amateur historian who extensively interviewed Baker and McConnell, the two met at a Halloween party in Norman, Oklahoma, in 1966. McConnell, at this first meeting, expressed his belief that gay people should not be treated like second-class citizens. Not long after, Baker —a U.S. Air Force veteran with an undergraduate degree in engineering — was fired from a job at Tinker Air Force base for being gay.

Soon the couple relocated to Minneapolis and the University of Minnesota, McConnell to take a job at its library and Baker to study law. He joined a campus group called FREE (Fight Repression of Erotic Expression), an early gay-rights group.

” Baker and McConnell — educated, clean-cut and handsome — contrasted with the typically scruffy counterculture activists of the era. But the Hennepin County attorney blocked their bid for a marriage license, a decision upheld by a district judge and affirmed by the state Supreme Court with reasoning that echoes in today’s arguments against gay marriage: “The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the Book of Genesis.”

Asked via email why they pursued the case, Baker wrote, “The love of my life insisted on it.”

Two decades after the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed Baker vs. Nelson, the Hawaii Supreme Court in 1993 ruled that homosexuals had a constitutional right to marry. It started the ball rolling on a movement that has seen many victories and setbacks since.

“Jack was the politician — outgoing and effective, manipulating the material world,” said Roger Lynn, a retired Methodist pastor who performed a marriage ceremony for the men in 1971, and who remains in touch with them occasionally. “Michael was the librarian, detail-oriented, more introverted. They were a good match, and they’re still making it work.”

In a strange twist to their story, Baker wrote via email that he and McConnell would be personally unaffected if Minnesota legalizes gay marriage. In 1971, about 18 months after Hennepin County rejected their application, the couple traveled to southern Minnesota’s Blue Earth County, where they obtained a marriage license on which Baker was listed with an altered, gender-neutral name.

That license was later challenged in court but was never explicitly invalidated by a judge. While Baker recently predicted on his blog that gay marriage would be legalized in Minnesota soon, he emailed that he and McConnell don’t see a need to make it official in Hennepin County.

“We are legally married,” Baker wrote.

Inquirer Viber
  • Tags:

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of INQUIRER.net. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • bugoybanggers

    Ito ang gustong mangyari ng mga PROTESTANTE o mga KUNYARI mga KRISTIANO kuno. MAtulad sa AMERICA at EUROPA ang PILIPINAS. Mga makamundong hangarin para daw sa KALIGTASAN.

    • generalproblem

      ito yung gustong mangyari nung pro rh bill hehhe. pansinin nyo ang lahat ng may gusto sa kongreso eh mga bading hhehe

  • EdgarEdgar

    Unfortunately for Noynoy, same sex marriage will never happen in the Philippines. And his late father Ninoy will never forgive him for his homosexuality.

    • generalproblem

      kaw lang naman yata ang may gusto kasi gusto maging asawa yung security guard sa inyo hehhehe. dika papatulan nun masarap pa din yung tutuong butas hikhikhik

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks

advertisement

popular

advertisement

videos