| Gay Marriage Debate and defend your political beliefs as to whether or not marriage should be only defined as a union between a man and a woman. | 
02-02-2008, 09:28 AM
|
#1 (permalink)
| | Senator
Country:  Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: New Haven, CT
Gender: 
Posts: 6,487
Thanks: 350
Thanked 1,103 Times in 578 Posts
Points: 31,190, Level: 100 | Level up: 2%, 0 Points needed | | A Tiny Bit of Equality Comes to NY State
N.Y. court declares out-of-state gay marriages valid Fri Feb 1, 7:53 PM ET
NEW YORK (Reuters) - A New York appeals court ruled on Friday that valid same-sex marriages performed in other states or countries must be recognized in New York, the first known ruling of its kind in the country, a rights group said.  
"This is a victory for families, it's a victory for fairness and it's a victory for human rights," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union. "Now we need to work toward a New York where you don't have to cross state or country lines to get married."
Gay marriage is a hot political issue in the United States. Massachusetts is the only U.S. state that allows same-sex marriage, while several states allow civil unions for gay couples. More than 25 states have constitutional amendments barring same-sex marriage.
The case was originally brought in 2005 in New York state court by Patricia Martinez, a word processing supervisor at Monroe Community College in Rochester. Martinez argued her wife, Lisa Golden, should be awarded spousal health benefits.
The women were married in Canada in 2004, but the college argued the marriage was not valid in New York. The state court agreed.
On Friday, an appeals court panel, in a unanimous ruling, found the marriage "is entitled to recognition in New York in the absence of express legislation to the contrary."
"The Legislature may decide to prohibit the recognition of same-sex marriages solemnized abroad. Until it does so, however, such marriages are entitled to recognition in New York," the court ruled.
A representative from Monroe Community College was not immediately available for comment on Friday.
(Reporting by Edith Honan, Editing by Michelle Nichols and Peter Cooney) N.Y. court declares out-of-state gay marriages valid - Yahoo! News
__________________ *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* 
"know this is EXACTLY why people think you shouldnt have equal rights" 2/11/08 Grace | 
|  | |
02-02-2008, 11:30 AM
|
#2 (permalink)
| | Kitchen Enchantress
Country: Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Illinois
Gender: 
Posts: 3,244
Thanks: 2,799
Thanked 354 Times in 223 Posts
Points: 12,869, Level: 74 | Level up: 75%, 381 Points needed | | A step into the right direction. WTG New York! | 
| | |
02-02-2008, 12:32 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
| | Super Sage
Country: Join Date: Dec 2006
Gender:
Posts: 4,059
Thanks: 124
Thanked 103 Times in 90 Posts
Points: 15,649, Level: 80 | Level up: 81%, 201 Points needed | | Not too long ago, I would have been happy for this proclaimed victory. But I don't feel the same way these days.
First of all, it's the name game...marriage, union, blah-blah-blah.
Let whoever call whatever they got, whatever they want to call it.
But I don't believe that love ought to be sanctioned by the state at all.
So I would rather see the dismantling of marital laws rather than the inclusion of more folk that can make use of them.
OhDear
__________________
| |
| | |
02-02-2008, 12:42 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
| | Council Member
Country: Join Date: May 2007 Location: Wyoming
Gender:
Posts: 1,766
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Level up: 44%, 166 Points needed | | Cherry Chocolate Dr. Pepper?
That's just WRONG!
__________________
If at first you don’t succeed – try, try again and then quit. There’s no sense in making a damned fool of yourself. – W.C. Fields
| |
| | |
02-02-2008, 12:59 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
| | Congressional Representative
Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Alabama
Gender:
Posts: 2,113
Thanks: 991
Thanked 303 Times in 158 Posts
Level up: 59%, 110 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by OhDear  But I don't believe that love ought to be sanctioned by the state at all.
So I would rather see the dismantling of marital laws rather than the inclusion of more folk that can make use of them.
OhDear
|
The only problem with that idea is that it would entail the development of entirely new traditions of law for inheritance, pensions, insurance benefits, child support in the case of a separation, ad infinitum.
__________________
unfknblvbl
"I will hold up America to the lightning scorn of moral indignation. In doing this I shall feel myself discharging the duty of a true patriot; for he is a lover of his country who rebukes and does not excuse its sins." -- Frederick Douglass | |
| | |
02-02-2008, 01:08 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
| | Super Sage
Country: Join Date: Dec 2006
Gender:
Posts: 4,059
Thanks: 124
Thanked 103 Times in 90 Posts
Points: 15,649, Level: 80 | Level up: 81%, 201 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyFlamingos
The only problem with that idea is that it would entail the development of entirely new traditions of law for inheritance, pensions, insurance benefits, child support in the case of a separation, ad infinitum.
| Nah...just grandfather pre-existing marriages into civil unions.
And every couple has to have a legal document per their sharing portfolio.
Children being a separate issue with documentation as well.
It would do away with the need for divorce laws then too.
OhDear
__________________
| |
| | |
02-02-2008, 01:22 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
| | Congressional Representative
Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Alabama
Gender:
Posts: 2,113
Thanks: 991
Thanked 303 Times in 158 Posts
Level up: 59%, 110 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by OhDear Nah...just grandfather pre-existing marriages into civil unions.
And every couple has to have a legal document per their sharing portfolio.
Children being a separate issue with documentation as well.
It would do away with the need for divorce laws then too.
OhDear
|
So civil unions are not sanctioning of love by the state?
__________________
unfknblvbl
"I will hold up America to the lightning scorn of moral indignation. In doing this I shall feel myself discharging the duty of a true patriot; for he is a lover of his country who rebukes and does not excuse its sins." -- Frederick Douglass | |
| | |
02-02-2008, 01:28 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
| | Super Sage
Country: Join Date: Dec 2006
Gender:
Posts: 4,059
Thanks: 124
Thanked 103 Times in 90 Posts
Points: 15,649, Level: 80 | Level up: 81%, 201 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyFlamingos
So civil unions are not sanctioning of love by the state?
| CF, sometimes I don't know what I am talking about!
But I do believe that all that ought to be required is that if couples want to share assets in stead of any union whatsoever, simply document legally what all is shared, and what all gets divided and how, should the couple separate or if one partner dies.
I guess with pre-existing unions and/or marriages, urge for them to have the documentation in place as well, but then phase out state involvement in hailing couples as married at all.
OhDear
__________________
| |
| | |
02-02-2008, 02:10 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
| | Congressional Representative
Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Alabama
Gender:
Posts: 2,113
Thanks: 991
Thanked 303 Times in 158 Posts
Level up: 59%, 110 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by OhDear CF, sometimes I don't know what I am talking about!
But I do believe that all that ought to be required is that if couples want to share assets in stead of any union whatsoever, simply document legally what all is shared, and what all gets divided and how, should the couple separate or if one partner dies.
I guess with pre-existing unions and/or marriages, urge for them to have the documentation in place as well, but then phase out state involvement in hailing couples as married at all.
OhDear
| So we should pay lawyers thousands of dollars to take care of something that is already on the law books such that it can be taken care of for the price of a marriage license (usually around $25) and a simple, "I do."
Why make things more complicated and expensive than necessary?
Most poor and/or uneducated people are just going to skip the procedure altogether and the civil court system is going to be tied up with a quagmire of legal issues involving inheritance and separation and child support for which they will have to build an entirely new body of legal precedence.
The current system seems to work quite well most of the time for heterosexual couples.
I see no point in fixing something that ain't broke.
__________________
unfknblvbl
"I will hold up America to the lightning scorn of moral indignation. In doing this I shall feel myself discharging the duty of a true patriot; for he is a lover of his country who rebukes and does not excuse its sins." -- Frederick Douglass | |
| | |
02-02-2008, 03:01 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
| | SIMPLETON
Country: Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: In my skin
Gender:
Posts: 7,408
Thanks: 107
Thanked 148 Times in 129 Posts
Points: 19,964, Level: 89 | Level up: 90%, 386 Points needed | | Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyFlamingos So we should pay lawyers thousands of dollars to take care of something that is already on the law books such that it can be taken care of for the price of a marriage license (usually around $25) and a simple, "I do."
Why make things more complicated and expensive than necessary?
Most poor and/or uneducated people are just going to skip the procedure altogether and the civil court system is going to be tied up with a quagmire of legal issues involving inheritance and separation and child support for which they will have to build an entirely new body of legal precedence.
The current system seems to work quite well most of the time for heterosexual couples.
I see no point in fixing something that ain't broke.
| But you do see the point in breaking something that's already working to please YOUR needs. Bullshit.
__________________  | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | |
