加州同性婚姻訴訟案昨日開庭

Two Californian men challenging a ban on same-sex marriage on Monday said they had been a couple for nine years and felt like third-class citizens, leading them to launch the federal case which could set a national precedent.

The men and a lesbian couple unable to marry in California hope to take their case against the state's Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage all the way to the US Supreme Court and to overturn bans throughout the nation.

A loss in the top court, two ranks above the action in the case which began on Monday, would seriously undermine efforts to win Gay marriage rights in state courts.

The United States is divided on same-sex marriage. It is legal in only five states, though most of those, and the District of Columbia, approved it last year.

Approval of Prop 8 in November 2008 was a sweet victory for social conservatives in a state with a liberal, trend-setting reputation, and maintained the steady success they have scored on the issue at the ballot box. Where it is legal, gay marriage has been championed by courts and legislatures, not voters.

"I don't think of myself as a bad person," said Paul Katami, describing the persecution he felt from a media campaign warning California parents to 'protect' their children by voting against same-sex unions in the 2008 poll.

He and his would-be husband, Jeffrey Zarrillo, described slights in gay life that ranged from being pelted with rocks and eggs in college to the awkwardness of checking into a hotel and not being able to clarify the relationship.

"Being able to call him my husband is so definitive," Katami said. "There is no subtlety to it. It is absolute."

Gays and lesbians have nearly equal rights under domestic partnership laws, but the two men said that left them feeling second- or third-class citizens and they wanted to be married to have kids.

"We hear a lot of 'What's the big deal?'. The big deal is it is creating a separate category for us," Katami said.

Gay rights lawyers in the case describe their battle as a continuation of the fight against racist laws stopping whites and blacks from marrying. Marriage is a fundamental Constitutional right, and in addition gays and lesbians deserve special protection from discrimination, they say.

美國加州一對同性戀男子就一項禁止同性婚姻的法案提起的訴訟案於本週一開庭，這項聯邦訴訟有望開創全美先例。這對同性戀人稱，他們在一起的九年裏，一直覺得自己被視爲“三等公民”。

這對無法在加州結婚的男同性戀人和另外一對女同性戀人希望將此訴訟案上訴至美國最高法院，抗議禁止同性婚姻的“八號提案”，並推翻全美有關禁止同性結婚的法案。

本案於本週一開庭審理，如果訴訟在高兩個級別的最高法院遭駁回，那麼在州法院爭取同性婚姻權利的努力將付之東流。

美國國內對於同性婚姻的態度存在分歧，目前僅有五個州將其合法化，其中大多數州和哥倫比亞特區直到去年才批准。

2008年11月，加州通過了“八號提案”，這對於加州的社會保守勢力來說是一場打勝仗，而且投票結果鞏固了他們已經取得的勝利，而加利福尼亞一直是一個以自由和創新而著稱的州。即便在同性婚姻合法化的地區，這種婚姻也只是受到法庭和立法機構的支持，而不是選民。

保羅•卡塔米說：“我不覺得自己是個壞人。”在2008年的“八號提案”公投中，媒體呼籲加州的家長們對同性婚姻投反對票，以“保護”自己的孩子。保羅•卡塔米稱自己感覺受到了傷害。

他和自己未來的丈夫傑弗瑞•薩利洛描述了同性戀者在日常生活中所遭遇的種種困難，例如在大學校園裏被扔石塊和雞蛋，在賓館登記入住時的尷尬，以及無法公開關係的痛苦等。

卡塔米說：“能稱他爲我的丈夫是確定無疑的，沒有絲毫含糊，千真萬確。”

按照同性伴侶的各項法律，男女同性戀和他人享有幾乎同等的權利，但卡塔米和他的伴侶稱，事實上這讓他們感到自己是二等或三等公民。他們想結婚，還想領養孩子。

卡塔米說：“我們聽到很多人說‘這有什麼大不了的’？ 其實‘大不了的’是同性戀羣體受到了孤立。”

此案的同性戀權利律師稱這場鬥爭是取締禁止白人和黑人通婚的種族主義法律鬥爭的一個延續。他們稱，婚姻是憲法賦予人們的最基本權利，而且男女同性戀應該得到特殊的反歧視保護。

Vocabulary:

trend-setting：establishing or influencing a new trend or fashion.（在思想、服裝等方面創新風的，領導潮流的）

slight：an act or instance of slighting indifference or treatment（侮慢；冷落；輕視）

pelt：to strike blows; beat with force or violence（投擲）