New York to Back Same-Sex Unions From Elsewhere

New York has joined the 21st century

nytimes.com/2008/05/29/nyregion/29marriage.html?_r=1&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss&oref=slogin

I am, however, interested in how this ruling sadly will leave out lower- and working- class same-sex couples who want to get married elsewhere and have their marriages recognized in NY. Not everyone has the money to fly to California or drive to Canada to get hitched!

Indeed. The 21st Century seems to be starting out as the century where legislatures and the will of the people are rejected and power returns to the hands of the few. :frowning:

Now, now. No need to dis NY.

Daddums :slight_smile:

Well the same deal happened in the south in the 1860s with slavery.

Sometimes you have to go against the will of the people to insure everyone is granted there rights.

While the Catholic Church may not allow for Gay Marriages other faiths do and unless they are hurting someone they should be allowed to practice there faith as they will.

After all would you like to see your Church conform itself to Islamic rules?

All this is going to do is make this one very big issue in the upcoming Presidential election…and frankly, I am glad for that. Honestly, I don’t believe the homosexual community has thought this through very well…extremely bad timing for them as it will rile up the country to vote against the candidate who supports it.

Maybe we should be grateful they are pushing this now…offers conservatives some hope come November!

This has nothing to do with churches and practicing their faith. They can marry and practice their faith in every state in the US. The question is whether it is right for society…it’s not.

And, it doesn’t compare to slavery. Not even close. Besides the lack of equivalency morally, our founding document had the argument against slavery built into it. There is no such parallel with gay marriage.

The reason is there is not currently any legislation against it. The Spitzer replacement Paterson issued an executive order because there is no legislation on it… I presume there will be some legislation enacted soon and it will end.

Not only that but I still want to know how one proves oneself to be gay? I mean, skin color and ethnicity is obvious…as is gender…but how do you prove your sexual preference without simply “demonstrating”…and even then, it doesn’t mean a blessed thing in today’s world!

I didn’t see where rlg94086 suggested there was a need to prove oneself gay, but I suspect you’re referring to sexual orientation as a protected class in some states. I’m not positive about this, but I don’t think you truly have to be a member of a protected class to be protected from discrimination based on the class people thought you belonged to. For instance, if I didn’t hire you because I thought you were Ecuadorian, that would still be illegal even if you were really a native-born Michigander of Danish heritage. There is no requirement that you prove yourself Ecuadorian in that case. And so it goes (I presume) with other protected classes.

Look at these comments -

It is amazing how successful the indoctrination has been.

What right is there to act wrongly?

While the Catholic Church may not allow for Gay Marriages other faiths do and unless they are hurting someone they should be allowed to practice there faith as they will.

How is hurt defined?

After all would you like to see your Church conform itself to Islamic rules?

What does that have to do with it?

Surely you are not suggesting their is any equivalence whatsoever between engageing in sodomy and being an African American?

Imagine the joy if there was truly the separation of Church and State.

Marriage is in itself a religious rite, a religious concept, a religious belief. The State should not be involved in it what-so-ever. No tax credits for it, no tax penalties for it, and no licensing fees.

The State can insure that minors are not being targets for abuse by “marriage” and the State can involve itself in the contracts between parties dealing with property and goods on a secular level.

But marriage is what-ever any Religion defines it as. As Catholics we see marriage differently than Baptists and we’re both Christians. Want to have multiple wives and your religion says OK? Go for it. Want to have same gendered marriages and your religion allows it? Go for it. Do what ever you want. The State has NO business saying otherwise.

On the flip side of that coin, the State cannot tell Religious Organization A that does not accept homosexual unions that they must accept as valid those unions performed by Church B that does accept homosexual unions.

The State says abortion is OK and legal. As Catholics we reject that and live out our lives. If the State recognizes or approves of homosexual unions the Catholic Church will reject them and we will still live out our lives.

I say tell the State to butt out, completely.

We as a society form our conscience as we see fit. As practicing and faithful Catholics we allow our consciences to be molded by the Holy Spirit and we see the HS working through the Church’s teaching office. Therefore, we fall in line with those teachings and we give apologies for the soundness of those teachings and how they will greatly benefit all in society if all adhere to them. But the reality is that not all will adhere to it and there is nothing we can do about that except continue to live out our lives in peaceful example.

We can’t make rules for someone else’s sand box and they sure as hades ain’t gonna make the rules in ours.

Again and again on this forum I have seen people compare the two groups. Some people think it is a useful comparison; others do not. But having the argument again and again seems not to get anywhere.

People need to be called out EVERYTIME they make this patently racist assertion

Actually, I would very strongly disagree with the idea that it is a “racist” statement, especially considering the fact that prominent civil rights activitst such as Coretta Scott King and Mildred Loving (part of the Supreme Court case that ended up declaring miscegenation laws illegal) died in the past couple of years, their last Civil Rights efforts being in the arena of gay and lesbian rights. I am an African-American Studies major in college. In the last chapter of the Philadelphia School District’s textbook for African American History in high schools is a passage about the connections between African American civil rights and the civil rights of gays and lesbians, and how these two communities intersect.

usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-03-24-king-marriage_x.htm

With the unemployment rate skyrocketing, with the price of fuel skyrocketing, with the price of food skyrocketing, with medical costs skyrocketing with the treat of war with Iran in the forefront, I sincerly hope the American People will not base their votes on something that effects 1% of gay people who even want to be "married of the 3-5% of the population who is gay or bi-sexual, but will base their votes on insuring our country survives without economic and military collapse.

Sounds like many want to “cut off their nose to spite their face”…Hopefully we’ve learned a few things in the past 8 years and are truly ready for change for the better. I want to believe the American People are not going to be duped by the conservative religious fringe as they were with Bush…I have high hopes.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.