With Maine becoming the fifth state in the union to approve same-sex marriage, our former Jaime McLeod, a member of MTV's Street Team '08, wrote a blog for us about what the ruling means to her ...

Five years ago, my partner and I stood up in front of our families, our friends and our God, and pledged to walk together and care for one another, no matter what life brings. Though it wasn't legally binding, we meant it, and we still mean it today.

In 89 days, we will finally be able to make the vows we made to one another official. It won't change the way we see our relationship. It won't change the way those who love us see our relationship. And, for that matter, it won't change the way those who hate us see our relationship. As some of my gay friends keep pointing out, gay marriage won't cure homophobia. It won't cure AIDS. It won't keep queer kids from getting bullied in school. But it's a step. It ensures that the relationship my partner and I have worked so hard on for the last eight years doesn't receive fewer protections under the law than the drunken Vegas wedding of a pop starlet to some guy she hardly knows. It means our friends won't have to go through a ridiculously difficult legal process so that their kids can have two legal parents. And it means that a majority of legislators in my state were willing to stand up and acknowledge that same-sex relationships are just as valid as heterosexual ones.

Thank you, Maine State Legislature, and Gov. Baldacci, for doing the right thing and affirming the rights of all Mainers. You're all invited to my second wedding!

Today, the Vermont Legislature overrode Governor Jim Douglas' veto of the bill allowing same-sex couples in the state to marry legally. Vermont, with this measure, became the fourth state to legalize gay marriage, along with Massachusetts, Connecticut and everyone's favorite wild card, Iowa. (Come on, New York! Seriously.)

What is exceptional about this story, however, is that Vermont is the first state to legalize gay marriage by legislation rather than a ruling which, to many, signals an even greater sea change for gay rights in America.

With that in mind, our attention turns to Proposition 8, which the Supreme Court of California must decide to uphold or overturn by June 5, three months after the court heard oral arguments. While those of us in the LGBTQ community obviously would like to see Proposition 8 overturned, I'd like to pose a caveat to that argument.

Perhaps the significance of having legislation or a vote in November 2010 to overturn what many call an anti-equal-rights proposition is more integral to our larger goal of gay rights than having the Supreme Court overturn it now. While the legalization of gay marriage in California would have to wait about a year and a half longer, it would also set a precedent that the public is behind the LGBTQ community and supportive of equality. Further, we are a nation of the people, based upon democratic principles and electoral value — a vote in 2010 would reinstate those principles and perhaps take a larger step toward our greater goals.

Just as Governor Jim Douglas' veto inspired the people of Vermont to fight for the cause, leading to the legalization of gay marriage in that state, perhaps the fight against Proposition 8 in California will lead to the public realization that equal rights should be extended to every citizen in every state in this nation.

Yesterday, a California appeals court ruled that a Christian high school in Wildomar did not violate California's anti-discrimination law when it expelled two 16-year-olds whose bond was "characteristic of a lesbian relationship.” The school claimed that because it is a private institution, it does not have to comply with state laws, such as the one pertaining to discrimination. Boy Scouts of America v. Dale — a 1998 New Jersey case whose original decision was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2000 stating that private organizations could refuse entry to anyone they wish — provided a precedent for this case. Wait — so does this mean that a private institution or social organization could arbitrarily decide not to include black people? Or Jewish people? For some reason, I feel like that wouldn't go over so well. That brings us to the ever-complicated question of when to draw the line when it comes to legality, morality and, you guessed it — the church.

Gays in California already lost the right to marry back in November after Prop 8 passed — but now we can't go to school either? These girls didn't even explicitly say they were lesbians! Instead, after the girls claimed that they loved each other only as friends, the high school retorted that one girl's MySpace profile had "bisexual" and the other girl’s had "not sure" under the “sexual orientation” section. How embarrassing, in 2009, would a widespread "find out who's gay" witch hunt of students' MySpace and Facebook pages be? I thought McCarthyism was a strategy 40 or 50 years ago. Perhaps equality should be our new strategy now.

Anyway, that's the impetus behind today's "Day Without a Gay" movement. LGBT people across the country were asked to "call in 'gay' " in order to show that, if we cannot enjoy the same rights as our straight buddies (see: the passage of Prop 8 in California, or just read most state constitutions), we really aren't being recognized as productive and beneficial members of society. "Day Without a Gay" is a way to exemplify what life would be like without gays in society.

What would happen if we eliminated the gays? Well, we'd need a much smaller office over here, that's for sure. And no Rachel Maddow? No Ellen? No Clay Aiken? Umm ...

Would part of Lindsay Lohan disappear?

But here's the thing: What about companies like Viacom/MTV that came out against Prop 8? I've worked for a few different companies in my life, and nowhere has had such an LGBT-friendly and welcoming atmosphere (OK, let's be honest ... it's sometimes weird if you're not gay around here). I don't want a small-form revolution against a company that has not only accepted but celebrated my sexual orientation. So I'm here, working, writing and shooting. Plus, God knows we need everyone we've got around here.

I think everyone should take a moment to check out the company handbook or call the press department and see where your office stands on gay rights and, if you can, on Prop 8. If it seems like us gays aren't fully supported by your workplace, leave now and call in gay. But if you work for somewhere like Viacom where equal rights are a given, perhaps we should celebrate that rather than walking out.

There was something different about yesterday's "coming out" moment, beyond the fact that I was staring at my parents, who were surrounded by thousands of gay people (a first for them, undoubtedly). This time, I was coming out for a tangible, structured, pro-social, and active reason.

Yesterday, 4,000 people gathered in front of City Hall to protest the passing of Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in California. Having been asked to speak, I gathered some enthusiastic and supportive friends, including our own John Norris, for brunch in Tribeca to brainstorm some ideas and to discuss the current obstacles we faced beyond Prop 8, such as the Defense of Marriage Act, Don't Ask Don't Tell and ... yeah, Katy Perry.

By the time I was called to step onstage and approach the podium, I was calm and collected, exhilarated from the energy of the masses before me. For the next six minutes, I described my frustrations with the ignorant enclaves of society, the way a sexual orientation has been adopted and exploited for Perry's "feel-good hit of the summer" and how my lifestyle is safe and even entertaining to people — as long as I stay inside their TV screens. More strongly, though, I expressed my hope and faith in the furthering of the gay-rights movement. If people 65 years of age and over had not voted, Prop 8 would not have passed. And contrary to the story that has penetrated the media for weeks now — that Latino and black voters were responsible for Prop 8's passage — I told the audience that a strong majority of African-Americans under age 30 voted against the proposition. I also asked everyone whom they had invited to the rally, and who would be standing with them now, had they been invited. I had spent the last two days trying to decide if I should invite my parents, and if they would even come. I made the decision to invite them yesterday, and so they showed up to their very first gay-rights rally, excited and proud.

As a member of a community that has undergone a significant setback on an Election Day that emanated "hope" and "change," I have learned that we cannot assume who will be with us or against us, and that we should not ignore those who have voted against us in the past. Barack Obama is the president-elect because his campaign talked to everybody and assumed nothing. The LGBT community needs to take those same steps. Perhaps, with that in mind, our constitution can be a rule of law that protects our rights rather than takes them away.

I came home last night to find my friend Kyle on the phone, coming out to his brother — something he had been meaning to do since he realized he was gay. His brother asked him if he'd seen any of the Giants games recently, so Kyle seized the moment and exclaimed, "No, but maybe that's because I'm gay." (That's perhaps one of the best ways I've ever heard of someone coming out.) Hanging up the phone, Kyle told me that it was the line in my speech that asked, "Who have you not yet come out to that you could?" that inspired him to tell his brother last night.

Prop 8 has been passed, and that battle has been lost, but the solidarity, confidence, bravery and inspiration that has now infused itself into people like Kyle could lead to the victory of the greater war.