| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Mon May 17, 2004 7:29 am Mass. Becomes First State to Legalize Gay Unions |
|
| Quote: |
Mass. Becomes First State to Legalize Gay Unions
Monday, May 17, 2004
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. � Two by two they emerged from City Hall, the nation's first gay couples set to legally marry, breaking a barrier many never believed would fall and putting the United States among four countries in the world that recognize same-sex weddings (search).
With the passage of a midnight deadline, Massachusetts became the first state to process marriage licenses for gay and lesbian couples Monday. Cambridge was the only city to seize the first possible moment, opening its offices to 260 couples � even supplying a giant wedding cake � as thousands of sign-waving well-wishers cheered into the wee hours.
Despite the late night, some couples said they would try to leapfrog the state's three-day waiting period by asking a judge to let them tie the knot later in the day, a routine request that is rarely turned down.
"Somewhere, someone's working really hard to find that loophole," to quash the gay-wedding march, said Baxter Brooke, 35, of Cambridge, who hoped to wed her partner, Sonia Hendrickson, 36, on Monday. "We're worried that it's not going to last."
Other Monday wedding plans included the seven couples who brought the lawsuit that eventually led the state's highest court to declare gay marriage legal.
The first couple to receive marriage paperwork was Marcia Hams, 56, and her partner, Susan Shepherd, 52, of Cambridge. After 27 years together, they sat at a table across from a city official shortly after midnight, filling out forms as their adult son looked on.
"I feel really overwhelmed," Hams said as they left the clerk's office and walked through a throng of reporters. "I could collapse at this point."
Massachusetts was thrust into the center of a nationwide debate on gay marriage when the state's Supreme Judicial Court issued its 4-3 ruling in November that gays and lesbians have a right under the state constitution to wed.
In the days leading up to Monday's deadline for same-sex weddings to begin, opponents looked to the federal courts for help in overturning the ruling. On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court (search) declined to intervene.
The SJC's ruling emboldened officials in San Francisco, upstate New York, and Portland, Ore., to issue marriage licenses as acts of civil disobedience earlier this year. Even though courts ordered a halt to the wedding march, opponents pushed for a federal constitutional gay marriage ban, which President Bush (search) has endorsed.
The SJC's ruling also galvanized opponents of gay marriage in Massachusetts, prompting lawmakers in this heavily Democratic, Roman Catholic state to adopt a state constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage but legalize Vermont-style civil unions. But to take effect it must get by another session as well as voters. The earliest it could wind up on the ballot is 2006 � possibly casting a shadow on the legality of perhaps thousands of gay marriages that take place in the intervening years.
As of Monday, Massachusetts joins the Netherlands, Belgium and Canada's three most populous provinces as the only places worldwide where gays can marry. The rest of Canada is expected to follow soon.
Early Monday morning, police estimated that more than 5,000 people had descended on City Hall in Cambridge, across the Charles River from Boston and home to Harvard University. Besides scores of reporters, many in the crowd were family and friends; others simply wanted to join the party and express support.
Police said the crowds were orderly, and no arrests were reported. About 15 protesters, most from Topeka, Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church, stood near City Hall carrying signs. The group, led by the Rev. Fred Phelps Sr., travels around the country protesting homosexuality.
But the atmosphere was overwhelmingly festive. People cheered and held signs reading "Yay!" and urged couples to kiss as they left City Hall. The city provided a giant wedding cake for couples, many of whom had waited in line for hours.
"We came here because I've been waiting seven years and I don't want to wait another day, another second," said Alex Fennell, 27 a Boston lawyer marrying Sasha Hartman, 29. "For me, it's excitement and gratitude. It's nothing I ever thought we would be able to do."
Hillary and Julie Goodridge, namesakes of the landmark lawsuit that started it all, tried to get a marriage license in Boston three years ago but were turned down. This time, Mayor Thomas Menino planned to greet them at Boston City Hall, where they were expected first thing Monday morning.
Out-of-state gay couples are likely to challenge Massachusetts' 1913 marriage statute, which Gov. Mitt Romney, a gay-marriage opponent, has cited to limit marriages to only Massachusetts residents. The law bars out-of-state couples from marrying in Massachusetts if the union would be illegal in their home state.
Several local officials, including those in Provincetown, Worcester and Somerville, have said they will not enforce Romney's order and will give licenses to any couples who ask, as long as they sign the customary affidavit attesting that they know of no impediment to their marriage.
Both sides in the debate say the issue may figure prominently in the November elections across the country.
Candidates for Congress could 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.
But the possibility of future bans didn't faze Chris McCary, 43, and his partner, John Sullivan, 37, who came to Provincetown to get married � despite that their union won't be recognized back home in Alabama.
"This is the most important day of my life," McCary said. "This window could be closed in the future but it's still worth it."
Advertise on FOX News Channel, FOXNews.com and FOX News Radio
Jobs at FOX News Channel.
Internships at FOX News Channel (deadline to apply is FRIDAY, APRIL 9th, 2004).
Terms of use. Privacy Statement. For FOXNews.com comments write to
[email protected]; For FOX News Channel comments write to
[email protected]
� Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Copyright � 2004 ComStock, Inc.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Copyright 2004 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
All market data delayed 20 minutes.
|
|
|
|
Pah-Wraith
Sheikh
Joined: 30 Nov 2001
Posts: 6012
Location: Londonistan.
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 2:17 pm |
|
As long as it's a Secularist Marriage Ceremony they are done in, I'm pleased for them 
Last edited by Pah-Wraith on Mon May 17, 2004 2:27 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
John Connor
Admiral of the Terran Empire
Joined: 07 Sep 2002
Posts: 15657
Location: I.S.S Emperor
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 2:24 pm |
|
I heard about this and i think its great for them.
-------signature-------
Commanding Officer of I.S.S Emperor
 
|
|
|
Sonic74205
Rear Admiral
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 4081
Location: England
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 5:37 pm |
|
im pleased with that, it nice to hear that gay people aren't so seregated anymore
...
well it's slowy being phased out anyway
-------signature-------
<a href="<img>http://sonic.11.forumer.com</a>
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 5:56 pm |
|
I am distressed and upset at this legalization.
Gay marriage is wrong, they should not be allowed to marry gayly.
I am strongly opposed to it, and say that there should be an amendment banning it to the US Constitution.
And gay people are NOT segregated--they just can't, in all but one state, get married to other gay people. That's that.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 5:58 pm |
|
^I tend to agree with RM. I personally don't sanction gay marriage, I don't think it's right, even if it isn't done through a church.
|
|
|
Pah-Wraith
Sheikh
Joined: 30 Nov 2001
Posts: 6012
Location: Londonistan.
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 6:03 pm |
|
Why? Are either of you Homophobic?  (No Offense just asking)
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 6:23 pm |
|
^Agreed.....marriage is a religous thing to me....government approval is worthless in any case in my veiw. If the government allows it, so be it, people are free to decide that for themselves. As long as the Catholic Chruch doesn't allow this, I find no problem.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 6:50 pm |
|
| Pah-Wraith wrote: | | Why? Are either of you Homophobic? (No Offense just asking) |
None taken, and no, not at all. I've had a couple of friends who've been gay, one who's bi. I have nothing against them as people, they're some of the nicest I've met, I just don't approve of what they're doing; it's against nature, and my religion...no offense, simply what I believe.
|
|
|
Sonic74205
Rear Admiral
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 4081
Location: England
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 6:52 pm |
|
all the marriage would mean is that the two love each other very much and they want to show it, and that they will be together for the rest of there life.
whats wrong with that?
hhmmm?
well, im waiting for an answer
-------signature-------
<a href="<img>http://sonic.11.forumer.com</a>
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 6:59 pm |
|
| Chakotay1988 wrote: | all the marriage would mean is that the two love each other very much and they want to show it, and that they will be together for the rest of there life.
whats wrong with that?
hhmmm?
well, im waiting for an answer |
I would answer, but I think I'd offend people, and I don't want to do that.
|
|
|
Sonic74205
Rear Admiral
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 4081
Location: England
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 7:07 pm |
|
dont worry i already have been offended...many times tonight
-------signature-------
<a href="<img>http://sonic.11.forumer.com</a>
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 8:30 pm |
|
I don't see a problem with gay marriage, they have the same rights as everyone else.
I don't think the point of this is for it to be religious, simply a way that people can say that they have a bond recognized by the government. They now have the right to see loved ones in the hospital, etc.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Jeff Miller
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 22 Nov 2001
Posts: 23947
Location: Mental Ward for the Mentaly Unstable 6th floor, Saint John's 1615 Delaware Longview Washington 98632
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 10:58 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | I am distressed and upset at this legalization.
Gay marriage is wrong, they should not be allowed to marry gayly.
I am strongly opposed to it, and say that there should be an amendment banning it to the US Constitution.
And gay people are NOT segregated--they just can't, in all but one state, get married to other gay people. That's that. |
Gee how could I tell you weren't going to like it....  anyway I did some research about RM saying that Same sex people are not segregated heres the deffination of it.
seg*re*gate vb -gat*ed, -gat*ing : to cut off from others; esp : to separate by races -- seg*re*ga*tion n
IMO I think same sex people are their own race and by us telling them not to marry we are segregating them. I'm currious why the president is so hell bent on this issue I thought we were spose to seperate church and state and here we have a president who is trying to be the "Moral Crusader" when he has other problems on his hands. But all in all I am glad we are steping out of the dark age and giving them equal rights. And no offense intended to RM and B'lenna_Torrez but from the way you sound you sound alittle racist and homophobic no matter what you say but thats who you are and I can't say you can or can't be.
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 11:06 pm |
|
Not everyone who disagrees with homosexuality is a homophobe. It's so easy for you to throw that word around, isn't it?
The main point of contention is whether or not you are born gay or not. There is no evidence to prove you are, and as such, none to prove you aren't.
Morally, scripturally, however you want to take it, I find it wrong. That is my opinion. Am I scared of gays? No. Do I not want them in my community? Tsss, that's just ridiculous. How about not in my family? Sorry, too late.
Quit using the easy out, and taking all of those who think homosexuality wrong, and calling them homophobes, and think.
You want to marry the guy down the street, what's it to me? But having a parade down Main St. carrying a rainbow flag, screaming, "We are queer, and we are here"? (yes, have actually seen that). That's a bit much. I, nor my contemporaries walk down the street yelling we are straight. Because that kind of information is no one's business but our own.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 11:25 pm |
|
| Theresa wrote: | Not everyone who disagrees with homosexuality is a homophobe. It's so easy for you to throw that word around, isn't it?
The main point of contention is whether or not you are born gay or not. There is no evidence to prove you are, and as such, none to prove you aren't.
Morally, scripturally, however you want to take it, I find it wrong. That is my opinion. Am I scared of gays? No. Do I not want them in my community? Tsss, that's just ridiculous. How about not in my family? Sorry, too late.
Quit using the easy out, and taking all of those who think homosexuality wrong, and calling them homophobes, and think.
You want to marry the guy down the street, what's it to me? But having a parade down Main St. carrying a rainbow flag, screaming, "We are *beep*, and we are here"? (yes, have actually seen that). That's a bit much. I, nor my contemporaries walk down the street yelling we are straight. Because that kind of information is no one's business but our own. |
^I agree. First off, I am NOT a homophobe. I have NOTHING against gay people, I just completely dislike their actions--religiously and otherwise. I have been called that several times, as well as a racist for agreeing with Rush Limbaugh about a foolish comment he made. It IS so easy to just call someone a homophobe or a racist, isn't it?
And as I've stated in the past, what's to say against, then, for a non-religious arguement, that someone would marry twins, huh? We'd have to give them the same rights, eh?
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 11:28 pm |
|
| Jeff Miller wrote: | | And no offense intended to RM and B'lenna_Torrez but from the way you sound you sound alittle racist and homophobic no matter what you say but thats who you are and I can't say you can or can't be. |
RACIST??? COME now, Jeff. ME? RACIST?! I don't see how this fits. 
Saying 'Homophobe' implies I'm...what? That I have some sort of irrational fear? Excuse me, I do NOT. I lived NEXT DOOR to gay men since I was 3. I had NO problems with them. I never said ANYTHING to them about being homosexual. That was their problem, not mine, I had no right telling them how to be.
Homophobe; no. Come on. I don't think it's right, but that doesn't make me a homophobe. I have an opinion on it. People want to be homosexual? Go for it, doesn't mean I support it. Neither do I think that the government should support it. Just an opinion. I'm telling you, I have no problem with the PEOPLE, just what they DO.
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 11:31 pm |
|
^EXACTLY. Thank you for conveying my thoughts,
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon May 17, 2004 11:36 pm |
|
| B'Ellanna_Torrez wrote: | | Jeff Miller wrote: | | And no offense intended to RM and B'lenna_Torrez but from the way you sound you sound alittle racist and homophobic no matter what you say but thats who you are and I can't say you can or can't be. |
RACIST??? COME now, Jeff. ME? RACIST?! I don't see how this fits.
Saying 'Homophobe' implies I'm...what? That I have some sort of irrational fear? Excuse me, I do NOT. I lived NEXT DOOR to gay men since I was 3. I had NO problems with them. I never said ANYTHING to them about being homosexual. That was their problem, not mine, I had no right telling them how to be.
Homophobe; no. Come on. I don't think it's right, but that doesn't make me a homophobe. I have an opinion on it. People want to be homosexual? Go for it, doesn't mean I support it. Neither do I think that the government should support it. Just an opinion. I'm telling you, I have no problem with the PEOPLE, just what they DO. |
Same with me. However, I do not have experience w/ gay people...Or at least I don't think so... Still, it is my OPINION. Do we not have rights to that?
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Sonic74205
Rear Admiral
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 4081
Location: England
|
| Tue May 18, 2004 5:29 am |
|
just from reading what some of you people have said, it shows that your not completely clear. Being gay is not a choice, very much the same as being straight isn't a choice it's the way you are and there is no denieing that. It doesn't make anyone all that different though gay people still want a career gay people still like music and want to watch tv and most of them want a family and they want to get married VERY MUCH that same as a straight person. And they just want to express there feelings to there loved one and this is seen as wrong and people are against it. WHY? because it's with someone that is the same sex? But really when you think about it who they are attracted to is really non of you business. THIS is just ONE thing that makes them slighly different to you. Even though, no one is the same, everyone is unique and thats a fact, so why should this be any different.
-------signature-------
<a href="<img>http://sonic.11.forumer.com</a>
|
|
|
Oliver
Thought Maker
Joined: 28 Feb 2004
Posts: 6096
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
|
| Tue May 18, 2004 6:33 am |
|
Good! I'm all for gay marriages. It should be aloud around the globe!
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Tue May 18, 2004 7:39 am |
|
| Quote: | marriage
SYLLABICATION: mar�riage
PRONUNCIATION: AUDIO: mrj KEY
NOUN: 1a. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
|
Would anyone be happier if we called it a civil union....where they had the same rights and benefits as strait couples? I know I certainly would be much happier if it were called a civil union, that way it does not intrude as much on how sacred marriage is to some people. Just a proposal.
|
|
|
Sonic74205
Rear Admiral
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 4081
Location: England
|
| Tue May 18, 2004 7:41 am |
|
yes thats better
-------signature-------
<a href="<img>http://sonic.11.forumer.com</a>
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Tue May 18, 2004 7:46 am |
|
I just thought that because honestly, there is no reason to withhold the rights/benefits that married people get from homosexual couples. However, I see very clearly to some people that the term marriage refers to a sacred ceremony between a man and a woman, however, it honestly does not seem that people against gay marriage make all that good of an argument...this way, it would not be marriage, but a civil union, and people would not feel like marriage is becoming something that is not anymore sacred. I think(not speaking for anyone) that all that gay people want, are to just have the same rights as strait people. And there is no reason to withold those rights from them.
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Tue May 18, 2004 9:32 am |
|
| Chakotay1988 wrote: | | just from reading what some of you people have said, it shows that your not completely clear. Being gay is not a choice, very much the same as being straight isn't a choice it's the way you are and there is no denieing that. It doesn't make anyone all that different though gay people still want a career gay people still like music and want to watch tv and most of them want a family and they want to get married VERY MUCH that same as a straight person. And they just want to express there feelings to there loved one and this is seen as wrong and people are against it. WHY? because it's with someone that is the same sex? But really when you think about it who they are attracted to is really non of you business. THIS is just ONE thing that makes them slighly different to you. Even though, no one is the same, everyone is unique and thats a fact, so why should this be any different. |
There is plenty of denying that.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
