Love, marriage, and the baby carriage

Posted on February 25, 2007
Filed Under USA | Leave a Comment

Is marriage intrinsically connected to bearing and raising children? Advocates of same-sex marriage often argue peremptorily that it is not.
“In today’s society, the importance of marriage is relational and not procreational,” Yale law professor William Eskridge asserts in “The Case for Same-Sex Marriage”.

The privileged status of marriage in modern society, in other words, has to do with the love and commitment of the spouses, not with the needs of any children those spouses may produce. In its 2003 Goodridge decision mandating same-sex marriage, the Supreme Judicial Court was even more emphatic. To the argument that the state’s interest in marriage is connected to procreation, the SJC replied categorically: “This is incorrect.”

As evidence that marriage and childrearing are not fundamentally related, same-sex marriage proponents frequently point out that married couples aren’t required to have children. No law prevents infertile couples from marrying or orders childless marriages dissolved. If procreation is so important to marriage, they say, why should elderly couples, or couples determined not to have children, be permitted to wed?

Now a group of same-sex marriage supporters in Washington state has taken that argument to what even they describe as an “absurd” length.

Archly calling themselves the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance, the activists are promoting Initiative 957, a ballot measure that would restrict marriage rights to men and women capable of bearing children.

Couples would be required to have a child within three years of getting married, or their marriage would be annulled. Non procreating couples could stay together if they wished, but their union would be classified as “unrecognized,” and they would be legally ineligible for marital benefits.

The activists behind this proposal don’t expect it to become law. Even if voters were to approve something so outlandish, the Washington Supreme Court would strike it down.

Read more….

Source: The Boston Globe

Gay Rights advocates step up lobbying Traveling photo album puts human touch to fight for same-sex marriage

Posted on February 24, 2007
Filed Under New York | Leave a Comment

RoseAnn Hermann has gathered some snapshots for a photo album meant for the eyes of the New York Legislature: her parents’ wedding, her in-laws’ wedding, her own wedding, and her grown son, standing with the man he wants to legally marry.

She and others around the state are compiling the family photos to show support for giving New York’s same-sex couples the right to marriage. “When all is said and done, we want everything for our kids that we have,” said Hermann, who lives in Larchmont. “This is something I cannot give my kids. This is something I need our legislators to do for them.”

The traveling photo album will be taken to Albany for a lobbying day in May. About 30 to 40 local entries are going on display Monday at Cosi Restaurant in New Rochelle, and will remain there over the next month. An opening reception is planned for Monday night by the Empire State Pride Agenda and The Loft organization in White Plains.

Hermann said she purposely added photos of family and friends in a way that doesn’t distinguish between gay and straight. The images are intended to put a very personal face on a highly contentious political issue, and to highlight the numbers of friends and relatives who support the cause.

“It’s so easy to discriminate when you don’t put a face to the individual,” said Robert Voorheis, the co-executive director of Marriage Equality NY, which advocates marriage rights for same-sex couples. “This album is not just an album of gays and lesbians. It also has supporting families and straight people who are all committed to having relationships honored for same-sex couples. And I think that’s a wonderful thing.”

Massachusetts is the only state to allow same-sex couples to marry. New Jersey this week joined Connecticut and Vermont in offering civil unions, which provide the legal benefits of marriage under a different name. California offers similar benefits through domestic partnerships.

Voorheis and his partner, Michael Sabatino, were married in Canada in 2003. Such marriages generally do not carry over international or state borders, though. New Jersey will recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere as civil unions, essentially demoting their significance, Voorheis and Sabatino said. Read more….

Source: The NY Journal News

Irish gay marriage case heads to Supreme Court

Posted on February 23, 2007
Filed Under Ireland | Leave a Comment

A day after the Irish Parliament rejected a bill to legalize same-sex unions a lesbian couple is taking the issue of gay marriage to the Supreme Court of Ireland.

Ann Louise Gilligan and Katherine Zappone (pictured) are appealing a High Court ruling that their Canadian marriage cannot be recognized under the constitution.

As 365Gay.com reported Thursday, a private members bill was turned down in Parliament after the government used the court ruling as proof a clause in the constitution which says the government must protect the institution of marriage means the bill legalizing civil partnerships was unconstitutional. (story)

Zappone and Gilligan in their appeal say the High Court erred because the constitution does not specifically define marriage as only between opposite-sex couples.

Ann Louise Gilligan and Katherine Zappone, who had been together for 20 years, were married in British Columbia in September 2003 within months of the legalization of same-sex marriage there. At the time both women were working in Canada. When they returned home and tried to file a joint income tax return the Revenue Commissioners refused to recognize the marriage citing Irish law and ordered the women to file separate returns. That would result in paying higher taxes. Read more….

Source: 365Gay.com

First N.J. same-sex couples say ‘I do’

Posted on February 23, 2007
Filed Under New Jersey | Leave a Comment

On the first day most same-sex couples were able to join in civil unions under a new state law, several towns across Central Jersey reported applications from residents and ceremonies scheduled during the next few days.

Shortly after midnight Thursday, two Lambertville residents vowed to “share their lives openly with each other in a committed and binding relationship,” becoming one of the first same-sex couples in New Jersey to unite under the civil union law.

The ceremony for Beth Asaro and Joanne Schailey in front of a packed crowd at the Lambertville Justice Center took place exactly 72 hours after they filled out the application for the civil union early Monday morning. State law requires the waiting period for civil marriages and civil unions.

Asaro said the couple met through mutual friends and one of the first things Schailey said was, “I’m not going to get serious.” They have since been together for 20 years and registered as domestic partners in 2004, just five days after that state law went into effect.

Mayor David DelVecchio performed the ceremony, at the end declaring Asaro and Schailey to be “lawfully joined in a civil union. We’re sending a message that we follow the law and we embrace the law,” said DelVecchio, who is also president of the state League of Municipalities.

Some mayors have said they will give up performing civil marriages in order to avoid performing civil unions, though DelVecchio said the majority of 566 mayors in the state will likely comply with the law.

In Dunellen, Mayor Robert Seader said he was on the fence about performing civil union because of his religious beliefs, but changes to how the state allows mayors to collect fees for such ceremonies made him decide against performing the unions. One couple in Dunellen has applied for a civil union, officials said.

Same-sex couples who had already secured civil unions or marriages in other states were allowed to forgo the 72-hour waiting period, but the civil union between Asaro and Schailey was the first in the state, or at least among the first, for those unable to take advantage of that waiver. Other late-night ceremonies took place in Asbury Park and South Orange.

Along with Vermont and Connecticut, New Jersey is the third state in the nation where same-sex couples can join in a civil union. Massachusetts allows same-sex marriage.

The law — signed by Gov. Jon S. Corzine on Dec. 21 and effective 60 days later — followed a landmark state Supreme Court decision in October mandating that same-sex couples be given the same rights as married couples. New Jersey’s law does that, but without the title “marriage.”

While celebrating the law as a step forward, some activists and members of the gay community argue the civil union designation is still unequal and have pledged to continue pushing for marriage. Others are calling for an amendment to the state constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage.

Since Monday, officials in Bernards, Clinton Town, Clinton Township, Hillsborough, Raritan Borough, Readington and South Plainfield have also reported civil union applications.

Besides Asaro and Schailey, two couples from New Hope, Pa., and another from Rehoboth Beach, Del., have applied for civil unions in Lambertville, according to Municipal Clerk Loretta Buckelew. Once the couples apply for civil unions in their respective towns, the ceremonies will likely be divided between the mayor, council president and municipal judge, Buckelew said.

The mayor is expected to perform three civil unions for non-Lambertville residents on Friday as well as a marriage, according to the clerk’s office. Since Wednesday, five more couples from out of state have made informal inquiries about civil unions in Lambertville, officials said.

A pianist in the back of the room extended his set to help burn off four extra minutes until Buckelew, as a clerk, could legally sign the civil union license at 12:01 a.m. DelVecchio signed the license using one of the black and gold pens that Corzine used to sign the civil union bill into law last year.

Nearing the end of hectic week, Asaro said the very public way the couple decided to cement their relationship was possible because of an accepting environment in Lambertville, where they have lived for 10 years.

“I wouldn’t open myself up to this if I lived anywhere but Lambertville, I think I would have been too scared,” Asaro said. “But this community has been so welcoming, it wasn’t hard to take the leap.”

Source: Courier News

‘Civil unions, great, but we want marriage’

Posted on February 23, 2007
Filed Under New Jersey | Leave a Comment

Thursday marked the first day for same-sex couples living in New Jersey to officially hold civil union ceremonies. The law allowing for civil unions was signed by Governor Jon Corzine in December, but went into effect on Monday.

In Jersey City, that meant couples were going into the City Clerk’s Office to fill out their applications for a civil union. After a 72-hour waiting period, they received their licenses. Jersey City City Clerk Robert Byrne said that as of 10 a.m. Thursday, 15 applications were filled out.

Later that day, according to Walt Boraczek, president of the Hudson Diversity Action Council, at least two Jersey City couples were planning to get married in private once they got their licenses.

Boraczek, a gay man, does not have a partner, but was enthusiastic about what transpired last week. “The whole week of events has been a long time coming,” said Boraczek. “I think people did take advantage, especially if you were a couple who had been together for so long.”

Those who want to dissolve a civil union can follow the same procedures that heterosexual couples follow for divorce. That, Byrne explained, means filing papers in State Superior Court and the court would have to adjudicate if there is alimony and custody of children involved. Read more….

Source: The Hudson Reporter

Urban Argentines support same-sex marriage

Posted on February 23, 2007
Filed Under Argentina | Leave a Comment

Many residents of Argentina’s capital have no issue with same-sex couples getting married, according to a poll by Analogías released by Página 12. 73.1 per cent of respondents in Buenos Aires agree with gay and lesbian weddings.

Same-sex marriage is currently illegal in Argentina, although the country was the first in Latin America to authorize same-sex civil unions in 2003. This legislation does not contemplate several rights currently available for married couples, such as inheritance, adoption, or a survivor’s pension in the event one of the partners dies. Two regions allow same-sex civil unions: the province of Río Negro and the federal district autonomous city of Buenos Aires.

Argentina’s Congress is scheduled to review in October whether same-sex and heterosexual civil unions should have equal rights. The proposal was developed by an umbrella organization, known as the Argentinean Homosexual Community (CHA).

Same-sex marriage is currently legal in the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada and South Africa, and at least 18 countries offer some form of legal recognition to same-sex unions.

Source: Global Monitor

Posted on February 21, 2007
Filed Under Netherlands | Leave a Comment