Massachusetts to hold same-sex weddings

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Massachusetts to hold same-sex weddings
229
Sun, 05-16-2004 - 12:31pm

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apus_story.asp?category=1110&slug=Gay%20Marriage%20New%20Era


Sunday, May 16, 2004 · Last updated 6:34 a.m. PT


Massachusetts to hold same-sex weddings    Rings 


By DAVID CRARY
AP NATIONAL WRITER


For better or for worse, depending on which side of the ideological aisle one chooses, a divided America crosses a historic threshold Monday as state-approved marriages of same-sex couples take place for the first time.


Promised a waiver of the normal three-day waiting period, the seven gay and lesbian couples who successfully sued for marriage rights in Massachusetts will wed before relatives, friends and supporters in Boston and three other towns. The United States will become just the fourth country in the world where same-sex couples can tie the knot.


The couples' jubilation will be shared by gay-rights advocates across the country, including many in states such as New York, California, Washington and New Jersey where comparable lawsuits are moving forward.


"This isn't just one historic moment in Massachusetts," said Kevin Cathcart, executive director of the gay-rights group Lambda Legal. "It's the start of what will be a long period of progress and breakthroughs, with gay couples in other states also winning the right to marry."


For foes of gay marriage, Monday's weddings represent a stinging defeat - but one they hope will be reversed by a backlash among politicians and voters nationwide.


"What I'm starting to see is people who are apolitical, who never got involved before, saying, 'This is too much - we don't want same-sex marriage foisted on us,'" said Mathew Staver, president of a Florida-based legal group, Liberty Counsel, that is opposing gay marriage in numerous court cases.


Both sides in the debate expect the issue to figure prominently in the November election, with Massachusetts serving as a rallying cry and alarm bell.


Candidates for Congress will face pressure to explain their position on a proposed federal constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage. Voters in Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Missouri and Utah - and probably several other states - will consider similar amendments to their state constitutions.


"It will be a national referendum about gays and gay marriage," said Rod McKenzie of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. "We're the underdog when it comes to all these ballot measures - the scale is bigger than we've ever had to deal with."


In states with the ballot measures, divisive campaigns already are underway.


An Oklahoma gay-rights group, for example, took out newspaper ads last week showing an outline of the state with "Closed" stamped over it. The ad contended that businesses would leave - or stay away - if voters approved the constitutional ban on gay marriage.


State Sen. James Williamson, a Republican from Tulsa, called the ad outrageous and predicted that a ban would attract new businesses.


"There is a real hunger for a return to traditional values and for leaders who will draw a line in the sand to help stop the moral decay of this country," he said.


Nationwide, both sides are planning marches and rallies over the coming week - among them, pro-gay marriage events in Iowa City, Iowa, and Las Cruces, N.M., and a "Not on My Watch" rally in Arlington, Texas, for pastors opposed to gay marriage.


Also following the Massachusetts events with interest will be the thousands of gay couples who married in recent months with the encouragement of local officials in San Francisco, Portland, Ore., and a handful of other municipalities.


Those marriages are clouded by varying degrees of legal uncertainty, and even in Massachusetts there is a possibility that voters in 2006 could jeopardize the impending marriages by approving a constitutional ban.


Katie Potter, a Portland policewoman who married partner Pam Moen in March, said she was delighted by the Massachusetts developments yet worried that it could take years for marriage rights to extend nationally.


"It's important for my two children to be able to say, 'My parents are married,'" Potter said.


Anti-gay marriage activists have no sympathy for such arguments.


"If we move down the road to legalizing marriage for unnatural homosexual couples, it will lead to an explosion of intentionally motherless or fatherless households," said Dave Smith of the Indiana Family Institute. "That is a radical social experiment that will place children in harm's way."


Though opinion polls show that most Americans oppose gay marriage, the rate of acceptance is much higher among people under 30 - for the younger generation, polls show a roughly even split on the issue.


"There's an absolute inevitability there," said Lambda Legal's Cathcart. "There's no reason to think the next generation of young people will go backward."


Mathew Staver, referring to the same demographic trends, said the next 18 months would be critical for gay-marriage foes.


"The window is now to pursue a federal marriage amendment that would put a halt to this nonsensical patchwork of litigation," said the Liberty Counsel attorney.


Even if many Americans wish otherwise, Massachusetts, as of Monday, will join the Netherlands, Belgium and Canada's three most populous provinces as the only places worldwide where gays can marry, though the rest of Canada expected to follow soon.


In the Netherlands, which pioneered gay marriage three years ago, the practice now stirs little controversy. Cheryl Jacques, a former Massachusetts legislator who now heads the Human Rights Campaign, a major gay-rights group, hopes her compatriots eventually emulate the Dutch.


"For the vast majority of Americans, Monday will be a completely ordinary day - nothing's going to change," she said. "But for some Americans in Massachusetts - gay and lesbian families - it will be a truly historic day, when their families will be made stronger and their children will become safer."


"I'm very proud of my state," Jacques added. "Massachusetts is going to teach the rest of the country a lesson - equality doesn't hurt anyone."


---


Lambda Legal: http://www.lambdalegal.org/


Liberty Counsel: http://www.lc.org/





cl-nwtreehugger


Community Leader:  In The News & Sports Talk
I can also be found at Washington, TV Shows & QOTW


Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Wed, 05-19-2004 - 12:50pm
Ouch, I simply said it was preferable to have the biological parents.

Obviously there are exceptions such as mistreatment, neglect, abuse.

Step parents are wonderful for children and are/can be great parents. It wasn't meant to detract from the value that step parents have. In a great many cases they are better parents than the biological ones could ever be.

If you took offense you have my apologies.

Yes I have children and they are the greatest treasure I have.

I stand by my comment though that biological parents if good ones are prefered to any other solution.

Again I am sorry if I personally offended you or called into question your dedication as a parent.

Jim

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-30-2003
Wed, 05-19-2004 - 12:56pm
I worked for an adoption/foster agency for 2 years, In that two years not ONE GLBT couple had anything to with those children. It was mostly oler folks who had no more kids at home, or couples who didnt not have their own children, or those who wanted more than they already had, and the few who to get rich from fostering, but they dont last long.

During that 2 years i saw many "damaged" as you say children over the age of 12 being adopted. Babies are not all that available, it the kids who have been in system several years that are being adopted, quite frequently from what i witnessed.

I was saying sorry that i dont think that dish babies are natural means of conception for anyone, including those who cannot concieve and yes it is quite costly, and not very effective.

Avatar for baileyhouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-19-2004 - 1:01pm
Your apology means little as far as I'm concerned...Statements like that just prove that you are as closed minded as I thought you were..People like you are the reason I no longer practice organized religion.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Wed, 05-19-2004 - 1:04pm


iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Wed, 05-19-2004 - 1:12pm
So be it. I've done what I can and will lose no time wrestling with misgivings due to your misinterpretation of my statement.

If you believe you can get an understanding of my complete character from a dozen posts and have condemned me to being close minded than it shows your own lack of openess.

I make an attempt to understand everyone's point of view. If because I will not validate their feelings as fact that makes me close minded than ok.

Blaming me "and others like me" for your failure to practice organized religion is a shame. I would hope you chose that because of your own beliefs. You shouldn't let others influence you so.

I have been open, honest and friendly. I love debate and discussion and would not resort to personal attacks and I'm sorry if you feel I made one against you. But then again my appologies mean little.

Jim


iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Wed, 05-19-2004 - 1:14pm
Marriage is not defined in the US by Christianity it is simply guided by it. Marriage is a legal term set up by the US government. Religion doesn't play a part in it.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Wed, 05-19-2004 - 1:21pm

Sorry, if it doesn't cut it for you. Do you think it is a coincidence that a nation founded on Christianity is the greatest nation ever created?


I don't believe "Christianity" had anything to do with it.


There is a belief that because we all have differet beliefs one can't be superior to another's. If you don't believe your belief system is superior why would you follow it?


I follow my beliefs because they connect with ME...not because they make me feel 'superior' to anyone else.


Compare Christianity to another belief system and show me where another has produced greater positive effects than Christianity.


Ah yes...the Crusades, the Inquistion, the Salem witch trials, persecution of others who are not Christian, etc.


iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Wed, 05-19-2004 - 1:36pm
>I don't believe "Christianity" had anything to do with it.

History dictates otherwise.

>not because they make me feel 'superior' to anyone else.

That is the problem with individualism, its all about me me me. I said the belief system is superior, not that I am.

>positive influences have been an equal amount of negative effects.

Hardly equal.

>I think your percentage is off...again, do you have a scientific link to back up this figure?

At my finger tips no but I can certainly supply them for you. Although the research will summarily dismissed out of hand once I post it.

>Ah yes...tolerance, individuality and equality...the end of a nation...

Yes the end of a nation when we apply the real meanings behind the words:

tolerance: having to accept that which is wrong in the sprit of being "fair"

Individuality: multi-culturalism and the me first mindset. Nations exist because of a common bond not multi-cultralism or tribalism which is developing in the US.

Equality: "You have more give some to me so we are equal". "I get this advantage because of my race, its owed to me". Liberals don't want equality they want socialism.

Equality puts us on a level playing field and says "go!" and the best man wins. Yes life has winners and losers and no it isn't fair.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Wed, 05-19-2004 - 1:39pm

I worked for an adoption/foster agency for 2 years, In that two years not ONE GLBT couple had anything to with those children.


Perhaps it's the part of the country you live in...I know quite a few GBLT couples who have adopted children with 'challenges' - most with fetal drug/alcohol syndrome...and a couple


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-06-2004
Wed, 05-19-2004 - 1:39pm

Where was this adoption/foster agency located? If it was Indiana, there is no big surprise that you didn't have a lot of GLBT parents coming in to adopt. The record for Indiana is VERY bad. If in Illinois, then I am surprised, because Illinois has a pretty good record on gays and lesbians adopting.


IVF is actually pretty darn effective. Although I got pregnant the old fashioned way, a turkey baster*, I do know that many gay men are realizing the joys of parenting through Surrogacy. I, in fact, am currently in the process of becoming a surrogate for two wonderful gay men.

-=Seawyt

Pages