Op-ed: Disliking Us Is No Longer a Legal Rationale 

"Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples. The Constitution simply does not allow for 'laws of this sort.'" -- Majority Opinion, Perry v. Brown, February 7, 2012

And with that, on Tuesday the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, affirmed district judge Vaughn Walker's ruling striking down Proposition 8 as unconstitutional. There is much about this ruling to like, many great phrases and strong legal analysis that lays bare what we all know: There was no reason for voters to pass Prop. 8 other than dislike, discomfort, or distaste for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, and our relationships.

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Romer v. Evans, not liking a group of people is not a sufficient justification for denying them rights and protections guaranteed by our Constitution. And in the case of Prop. 8, the court focused on the fact that Prop. 8 eliminated a right by popular vote. At some level, most of us know in our gut that allowing such tyranny of the majority would lead to some very ugly outcomes, and now we have a federal appellate court joining our chagrin at such a state of affairs.

Make no mistake, while the Prop. 8 ruling is narrowly crafted and addresses only the unique circumstances of California, this is a huge deal. This ruling marks the first time a federal appellate court has ever ruled that denying the right to marry to same-sex couples is irrational. You know that. I know that. But now we have a federal appeals court backing us up.

We, and those who love and support us, are ecstatic, but our opponents are hysterical -- and not the funny kind. On its home page, the so-called National Organization for Marriage blares in typical histrionic overstatement, "EVERYTHING HANGS IN THE BALANCE!" And then begs for money to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The appeal letter, signed by its president Brian Brown, breathlessly concludes, "This is it. This is the whole ball game. If we lose here, the laws in 44 states defending marriage will crumble and we CANNOT let that happen!" Now, other than my show-tune queen boyfriends arguing over Patti LuPone versus Kristin Chenoweth, I have rarely seen such an overwrought, unrestrained plea. Oh, sorry, right. Brian Brown ...

But in the midst of all the parsing and analysis, I hope we will all take time for a few moments of reflection on our good fortune to be alive to see this. Too many of those who fought, risked, and sacrificed never lived to see liberation won. What we witnessed Tuesday was landmark, historic, unprecedented. A key event in our human rights struggle happened, and we lived to see it. This is a remarkable movement in a remarkable time. In the middle of it all, gratitude for being here to be part of it is worth a pause.

KATE KENDELL is executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, a legal organization committed to advancing the civil and human rights of LGBT people and their families through litigation, public policy advocacy, and public education.