Thanks for laying out the answers to some of the questions that may be floating around the community, Sara.

I'll be one of those out-of-staters taking advantage of the Cali decision!

Fourty years is a brief amount of time really, it just seems like forever if it occurs during your life. To go from being institutionalized for being Gay, to this day? To go from your expression of love being an illegality, to this day?

Sara, it is enough to rekindle one's belief in Santa.

I want all you GLB peeps to remember Thursday.

Now take that same feeling and imagine how your transgender brothers and sisters (who are on the sidelines watching this party and happy for you) will feel when we finally get an inclusive federal ENDA passed and signed into law

Sixth, it's not gay marriage. It's marriage equality. I wish everyone would stop calling it gay marriage. That was a tool of the right to make it into some kind of special privilege. It's not. It's about equal access to the same rights.

I thought that making marriage seem more legitimate than other relationship forms was a tool of the right....

And if it were really about equal access to the same rights, then why don't we just focus on expanding those rights instead of the institution of marriage? As Waymon posted a bit below here, it's not just about rights - it's a cultural question, it's about identity and legitimacy. Under that paradigm, I'd rather be same-sex married than marriage equalitied. If it's just about rights, though, I'd rather make those rights available to unmarried people and couples, and that would be closer to equality for me.

Fourth, there is no stay on this decision, as there was on the Goodridge decision in Massachusetts. And while there is a reality of probably a 30 day period of preparing for the change, people will be getting married BEFORE the very likely ballot question in November.

I heard that the Secretary of State in CA had to approve because there's a ballot measure pending on the same issue. Is that true? I'm going to look it up.

Second, a better opinion could not have been written. Every ridiculous, bogus retort about why marriage should stay a heterosexual privilege was responded to and completely dismissed. In fact, it declared there is a "fundamental right to marry."

I thought it was strange in that way too. Good strange, but it was like all those arguments that in LGB corners have become white noise at this point were actually believed by people in a position of political power.

It's definitely big in that respect.

I respectfully disagree with Monica. At least this trans person was not standing on the sidelines merely watching "you" LGB people celebrate Thursday's decision. Instead, I am celebrating the fact that, at least in California courts, making marriage available to all, regardless of the sex or gender of the partners, removes any question regarding the continuing validity of marriages where one spouse transitions from one gender to the other after already being married, and the validity of new marriages involving at least one trans partner entered into after this decision.

Second, as a lesbian identified trans woman, I am also celebrating the California Supreme Court's historic decision that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation must be evaluated under the "strict scrutiny" standard of review, which very few laws can survive. Although this change only applies to actions by California state and local governments and, thus, does *not* ban discrimination by private employers, landlords and others (which is largely already covered by state law), rooting out all governmental distinctions based on sexual orientation will have a widespread impact. Moreover, it opens up an additional argument in other states that adopt this reasoning, that, if governments are barred from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, there is no reason that private businesses should be permitted to do so. (Since California already bans sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination, this argument is not likely to be of much importance there.)

So, I celebrate with all people this historic moment affirming the equality of everyone, regardless of sex, gender or sexual orientation.

At least this trans person was not standing on the sidelines merely watching "you" LGB people celebrate Thursday's decision.

Thanks Abby. Some of these us vs them differences are just plain silly. I'd be happy to celebrate a trans victory without having to qualify it with "something for me."

As Sara says, "This is HUGE!"