KEY POINTS:
If I'm this emotional now just saying it, I can't imagine how it's going to be. We are very, very excited." That was a misty-eyed Ellen DeGeneres, soaking up a standing ovation on the set of her talk show, after announcing that she was planning to marry her partner of four years, the Ally McBeal actress Portia de Rossi.
DeGeneres bounced up and down on her sofa, clapping with excitement, too, while De Rossi beamed from the audience. It was one of those warm and fuzzy daytime-television moments, a bit of sharing between fans and a much-loved star. It may also, one day, be seen as the moment that the United States accepted the notion of gay marriage.
It is a bold claim, even rash perhaps, but the California Supreme Court's decision to overturn a ban on gay marriage was the most significant victory so far in the battle to claim equal rights for gay and lesbian couples in the US. Now, thousands of gay couples and a handful of Hollywood names are racing to celebrate their nuptials.
Within hours of the ruling, San Francisco's city hall was fully booked with appointments for marriage licences and ceremonies for June 16 - the likely date that the ruling will become effective. In West Hollywood, centre of the gay community in Los Angeles, registrars are considering opening a branch office to satisfy demand.
Since California will also marry couples from outside the state, the rush is also on to capitalise on the potential for wedding tourism. "San Francisco is proud to welcome lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) couples to the first city in the US to perform same-sex marriages and the only state in the US where everyone has a constitutional right to marry," said Joe D'Alessandro, of the San Francisco Conference and Visitor Bureau. "We encourage visitors to celebrate the freedom to marry in San Francisco, where LGBT history continues to be made."
Almost 50,000 couples have registered as domestic partners in California since 2000, most gay and lesbian, and many are expected to marry.
"There are loving, committed couples who have been 'engaged' for 30 years," said Brad Luna, of the Human Rights Council, one of the groups lobbying for the ruling. "They are seeing this as a truly historic moment in their lives."
DeGeneres is, it's fair to say, America's most famous lesbian. For a time, she appeared to prove that gay stars must stay in the closet to protect their careers. Viewing figures for her sitcom collapsed after she came out in 1997. Fundamentalist preacher Jerry Falwell called her Ellen DeGenerate but, in retrospect, it seems clear the declining audience had more to do with the show no longer being funny.
She bounced back as one of Hollywood's most bankable presenters, occasional compere for the Oscars and host of a daytime show that has made her a star of almost Oprah Winfrey proportions. TV Guide magazine has DeGeneres and De Rossi on their Power A-list of the media's most influential couples.
A little below the A-list, other names are likely to follow DeGeneres to the (metaphorical) altar. This week the Star Trek actor George Takei - the original Mr Sulu - announced he would marry Brad Altman, his partner of 21 years. "Our California dream is reality," Takei said. "At long last, the barrier to full marriage rights for same-sex couples has been torn down. We are equal with all citizens of our state.
"With time, I know the opposition to same-sex marriage, too, will be seen as an antique and discreditable part of our history. For now, Brad and I are enjoying the delicious dilemma of deciding where, when, and how we will be married."
The battle for gay marriage in the US is complicated by the complex relationships between federal government and the states. As President, Bill Clinton signed the Defence of Marriage Act which defined marriage as being between a man and a woman and blocked equal treatment for same-sex couples in federal matters such as tax and immigration. The states, though, have wide latitude and it is on a state-by-state basis that gay rights campaigners are now fighting their battles.
The California ruling came after a four-year legal struggle. In 2004, San Francisco's Mayor, Gavin Newsom, defied the outcome of a referendum that defined marriage as being between a man and a woman by opening the doors of City Hall to same-sex marriages. When the courts told him he was breaking the law, the city - along with gay rights groups and two dozen gay and lesbian couples - sued.
Like a number of states, California already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic partners the same legal rights and responsibilities as married spouses, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support. But its Supreme Court justices ruled 4-3 that domestic partnerships were not a good enough substitute for marriage.
Amid the excitement, gay rights groups fear and their opponents predict that California's summer of love will prove just as temporary as the seasons. The ruling was an important victory but the culture wars rage on.
It seems almost certain there will be another referendum in California alongside the presidential election in November, since fewer than 700,000 signatures are needed to get the gay marriage issue on the ballot.
This time, conservative groups are seeking a change to the state constitution that would overturn the Supreme Court's ruling.
The model is the same as the initiative that swept the US in 2004, when 11 states held referendums on banning gay marriage. George W Bush's adviser Karl Rove encouraged the ballots, saying they would act as a get-out-the-vote drive for likely Republican Party supporters. In some states, it may have made the difference in a close fight between Bush and his Democrat rival, John Kerry.
Some Barack Obama supporters are already nervous that gay marriage will rear its head as an election issue, a worry raised again and again in online discussions. Jeff Sarback, of San Francisco, wrote on a newspaper's website, "I hope I don't seem like I don't support gay rights; I just think the timing is bad. This cost us the White House in 2004. We have given John McCain 10 points in every state by doing this now."
As well as the wider political consequences, there could be personal ones. If the ban is reinstated by plebiscite, those same-sex couples who marry over the summer face finding themselves at the centre of a firestorm of litigation over whether the ban is retroactive.
Luna cites changes to public opinion in states that give same-sex couples marriage rights, and declining support in the Senate for anti-gay marriage measures. "I think we have passed that point in history," he said.
"In the states where we have won marriage rights or domestic partnerships or civil unions, right-wing extremists predicted that the sky would fall. But people still got up the next day and took their children to school and life went on."
This is why the ballot initiative in California this November will be happening in a different context to the one in 2000.
Unless conservative opponents succeed in a long-shot bid to have implementation of the Supreme Court ruling deferred until after the plebiscite, Californians will be voting to take away rights that are already being exercised by thousands of gay and lesbian couples.
For all its tongue-in-cheek, The Sun's headline announcing "Elton takes David up the aisle" was the moment it became clear civil partnerships had gone mainstream.
Sex And The City star Cynthia Nixon, 42, laughed off reports that she would marry her partner, Christine Marinoni, but said she would reconsider if it became legal in New York.
"I think one day soon, hopefully, it may [be legal], and then I think we'll consider it," she told chat show host Graham Norton.
There is one other celebrity endorsement for gay marriage that could prove pivotal in November.
Arnold Schwarzenegger, the California Governor, has twice vetoed legislation that would have granted marriage rights to same-sex couples. However, he said he "respected" the latest ruling and would not support a constitutional amendment that would overturn it.
- INDEPENDENT
I, PARTY A, TAKE THEE, PARTY B, AS MY INTENDED NUMBER 1
Since California legalised gay marriage, "bride" and "groom" are out.
So, what will the state marriage licence look like in the new era of same-sex marriages? Will it list "Partner A" and "Partner B"? "Intended No 1" and "Intended No 2"? Or will it contain blank spaces for the betrothed?
The court decision that legalised gay marriage in the state has created a semantic puzzle with scant time to solve it.
With the ruling tentatively set to take effect in three weeks, state bureaucrats must rapidly rewrite, print and distribute a marriage licence application.
The current one-page form uses "bride" and "groom" four times each, and also requires the signatures of an "unmarried man" and an "unmarried woman," wording that is out of step with the California Supreme Court ruling.
Kate Kendell, executive director for the National Centre for Lesbian Rights, said she was not particularly worried.
"This is where you don't want the perfect to be the enemy of the good," she said.
"If people can marry and those marriages are legally recognised in compliance with the court ruling ... having the Ts crossed and Is dotted on the form are the least of our concerns."
The person with the final word is Mark Horton, director of the state Public Health Department, which oversees the Office of Vital Records.
"It's too early for us to give specifics," said Linette Scott, a deputy director at the department. "We are going to be in compliance with the court order."
In Massachusetts, the only other state to legalise gay marriage, "bride" and "groom" were dropped from its marriage certificate in favour of Party A and Party B. Those individuals then check a box to indicate male or female.
In Vermont, which issues certificates of civil union for gays, couples also are identified as Party A and Party B.
Simply scratching out "bride" and "groom" on the current California form could be problematic. The form reads: "Make no erasures, whiteouts or other alterations."
Tom McClusky, a vice-president at the conservative Family Research Council, said the state should maintain two marriage forms, one of which preserved "bride" and "groom".
"If the definition is seen to be so fluid, where do you stop?" he asked.
"I can imagine the discussion in a couple of years of how many people should be included. Why is it wrong for two men and a woman to get married? I don't want to see the top of that wedding cake."
It could be a fleeting victory for gays, since religious and social conservatives hope to put a constitutional amendment on the state ballot in November that would undo the ruling.
Unlike Massachusetts, California has no residency requirement for obtaining a marriage licence.
That means the state could become a magnet for gays and lesbians nationwide eager to tie the knot.
The conservative Alliance Defence Fund plans to ask the High Court to stay its ruling until after the election.
"There will be all kinds of chaos and confusion if there are thousands of marriage licences issued to same-sex couples before November" and voters pass the amendment banning gay marriage, said Glen Lavy, senior counsel for the organisation.
For now, things are moving ahead, if haltingly.
In Los Angeles County, home to nearly 10 million people, officials are considering opening more satellite offices to issue marriage licences, recruiting more volunteer commissioners to conduct ceremonies and ensuring enough police to handle the crowds.
"We never find ourselves in a circumstance when things get implemented so quickly," said Steven Weir, president of the California Association of Clerks and Elected Officials.
"We already have people calling and making enquiries. Many are anxious to get a licence immediately, and some are extremely agitated they can't be accommodated right now."
- AP
