State Court Recognizes Gay Marriages From Elsewhere [Major BARF ALERT]

The New York Times ^ | 2/2/2008 | ROBERT D. McFADDEN

[XR7]

A New York appellate court ruled Friday that valid out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples must be legally recognized in New York, just as the law recognizes those of heterosexual couples solemnized elsewhere. Lawyers for both sides said the ruling applied to all public and private employers in the state.

Even though gay couples may not legally marry in New York, the appellate court in Rochester held that a gay couple’s 2004 marriage in Canada must be respected under the state’s longstanding “marriage recognition rule,” and that an employer’s denial of health benefits had discriminated against the couple on the basis of their sexual orientation...

For more than a century, the court noted, New York State has recognized valid out-of-state marriages. Moreover, it said that the Court of Appeals, the state’s highest judicial body, has said the Legislature may enact laws recognizing same-sex marriages. “In our view, the Court of Appeals thereby indicated that the recognition of plaintiff’s marriage is not against the public policy of New York,” the court held.

As a practical matter, the marriages of thousands of gay couples entered into outside the state have been recognized in recent years by many state and local agencies and by private employers...Friday’s ruling, legal experts said, was the first by an appellate division court...

“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 N.Y.C.L.U. “Congratulations to all same-sex couples validly married outside of New York State: You are now husband and husband, wife and wife. Now we need to work toward a New York where you don’t have to cross state or country lines to get married”...

[XR7]

Even though gay couples may not legally marry in New York, the appellate court in Rochester held that a gay couple’s 2004 marriage in Canada must be respected

WTF?!!
Why?

[gpapa]

This better be challenged in a higher court.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Foreign law strikes again

[Shady]

Because Gnu Yak is an immoral, socialist wasteland of professional politicians-prostitutes who have driven all of the jobs and incentives for capitalism out. George Elmer was a dunce, a twit and a dufus, but Boss Eliot, the entire legislature and the courts here are all power mad elitist socialists with only one thing in mind, stay in Albany and collect the spoils!
I can’t wait to leave.

[gondramB]

>>A New York appellate court ruled Friday that valid out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples must be legally recognized in New York, just as the law recognizes those of heterosexual couples solemnized elsewhere. Lawyers for both sides said the ruling applied to all public and private employers in the state.<<

Marriage is not a right - we should give citizens equal rights but government sanctioned marriage has never been for any two people - not even any two people in a male/female relationship. We have health requirements, we prohibits relatives from marrying and we impose age limits and limit people one marriage at a time. Government marriage is basically an incentive system to provide families that society judges best to raise children.

However.... this is coming because its in the constitution.

If one state grants a marriage, all other states have always been bound to recognize it under Article IV Section 1 - Full faith and credit.

>>Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.<<

[CaspersGh0sts]

To those who previously argued that federalism was the way to deal with this marriage issue, I submit EXHIBIT A.

It’s time to change your mind.

And I’ll also remind you that of the two leading Republican presidential candidates, one stood on the floor of the US Senate and argued on behalf of the Federal Marriage Amendment. And the other heard that argument and countless others and then proceeded to vote against it.

Interpret that as you will.

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

I agree. Two people who want to make a commitment to spend the rest of their lives with each other is bad for society.

Homos should be out on the street parading in leather and lace and by no means living humble lives in the privacy of their own homes with the normal legal protections and advantages of a civilly recognized union.

[kik5150]

When do I get to marry my dog? I have rights! Freedom and justice for ALL! Blah blah blah.....

[IGOTMINE]

OK...does this mean that my concealed carry permit from VA is now good in NYC?

[gondramB]

>>When do I get to marry my dog? I have rights! Freedom and justice for ALL! Blah blah blah.....<<

Well, no but your dog license ought to be good when you visit Florida. :)

[gondramB]

>>OK...does this mean that my concealed carry permit from VA is now good in NYC?<<

It ought to.... But then you shouldn’t need a permit to do something you are already guaranteed by the constitution.

[nyyankeefan]

this is the product of lib/dem judges and the piaps or b. hussein becoming president.....

if people think the affirmative action party candidates is offensive in 2008...just wait for the gay/lesbian/transgendered/illegal/felon canidates that want to run in 2012!!!

celebrate diversity!!!!

[Alter Kaker]

Because Gnu Yak is an immoral, socialist wasteland of professional politicians-prostitutes who have driven all of the jobs and incentives for capitalism out.

There are no jobs or capitalists in New York? Really?

[iowamark]

And I’ll also remind you that of the two leading Republican presidential candidates, one stood on the floor of the US Senate and argued on behalf of the Federal Marriage Amendment.

To whom are you referring? There is only one US Senator left in the Republican race, McCain, and he always voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment.

[longtermmemmory]

NOT ONE PEEP ON THE MSM!

Super Tuesday McCain protection template in place.

[Chode]

and the filthy disease ridden queers win again...

[K-oneTexas]

Because of the ‘Full Faith and Credit’ clause in the US Constitution. It’s the Law of the Land.

[Emmett McCarthy]

A lot of the “full faith and credit clause” of the constitution has been going arond this thread, but how does that apply to a marriage performed in Canada?

[gondramB]

>A lot of the “full faith and credit clause” of the constitution has been going arond this thread, but how does that apply to a marriage performed in Canada?<<

I wouldn’t think it does - I think we have a choice whether to respect arrangements from overseas - is this marriage from Canada? if so I totally missed that and I apologize for speaking without reading correctly.

[freemike]

Look,,, these judges are at the point they are just going to make their edicts about whatever they want regardless of the law!

Wanna marry your horse? Sure!

Don't like Christians on your property? No problem!

Promise you will donate to my re-election if I let you take your neighbors property! Good deal! It's done!