Gay Marriage in New York

[BrentRichards]

Originally Posted by andrewlittle

Anyone for a drag race.

I always tell my drag queen friends that I want to see a "drag race" instead of a pageant ... gun goes off and off they go in spike heels, big hair, screaming and swinging purses ... yeehah! Great image.

[keltic63]

Drag Queen Race? here ya go.....

[u-dog]

My wife had me convinced that it was impossible to run in high heels! Obviously another feminist lie, foisted upon the unsuspecting males of this country. Thanks Keltic for clearing that up!

[BrentRichards]

Originally Posted by keltic63

Drag Queen Race? here ya go.....

HAHAHAHAHA! All this, and Greek and Hebrew too!

[RM260boy]

Originally Posted by andrewlittle

Anyone for a drag race.

there was a club that i used to go to in orlando that actually did have drag races... funniest thing i think i have ever seen
they start in there regular(?) clothes, race accross the dance floor to where some blinds (too much duck hunting back in the day) where set up
they changed into drag and raced back accross the dance floor.
a real riot if you have never seen anything like it.

[BrentRichards]

Originally Posted by RM260boy

there was a club that i used to go to in orlando that actually did have drag races... funniest thing i think i have ever seen
they start in there regular(?) clothes, race accross the dance floor to where some blinds (too much duck hunting back in the day) where set up
they changed into drag and raced back accross the dance floor.
a real riot if you have never seen anything like it.

Now THAT'S entertainment!

[RM260boy]

Originally Posted by RM260boy

there was a club that i used to go to in orlando that actually did have drag races... funniest thing i think i have ever seen
they start in there regular(?) clothes, race accross the dance floor to where some blinds (too much duck hunting back in the day) where set up
they changed into drag and raced back accross the dance floor.
a real riot if you have never seen anything like it.

wow! i just reread what i posted... major issues with right spelling, but wrong word, fer crying out loud.
ah but it was a rough day

[tdogg]

Originally Posted by Daniel

If I have to, I will vote for her through gritted teeth.

I'm with you on this one buddy. Here's hoping our great hope comes along soon, but it's not looking too bright...

I can vouch for some women being able to run in high heels - ok this one anyway. While I prefer NOT to run in them, I have been known to nearly beat speeding bicyclist and leaping over tall coke bottles as I scurry my way to the airport terminal...gotta catch that plane at all costs!! And I feel pretty confident I could give the best of 'em a run for their money. I totally prefer my Ariats tho - a combo of sneakers and riding boots. Well, it depends on how high is high - I normally go only 3 inches?

Any of you other girlz out there can best 3 inch heels at a quick dash???

[Daniel]

http://www.365gay.com/Newscon08/02/020108ny.htm

NY Appeals Court Rules State Should Recognize Gay Canadian Marriages
by The Canadian Press

Posted: February 1, 2008 - 6:30 pm ET

(Rochester, New York) An appeals court has ruled that a gay couple's marriage in Canada should be recognized in New York.
The Appellate Division of state Supreme Court on Friday reversed a judge's ruling in 2006 that Monroe Community College did not have to extend health benefits to an employee's lesbian partner.

Patricia Martinez, a word processing supervisor, sued the school in 2005, arguing that it granted benefits to heterosexual married couples but denied them to Martinez and her partner, Lisa Ann Golden.

The couple formalized their relationship in a civil union ceemony in Vermont in 2001 and were married in Canada in 2004.

The college refused to add Golden to the health care benefits because its contract with the Civil Service Employees Association did not address benefits for same-sex partners. Since then, the contract has been enhanced to extend benefits to an employee's domestic partner.

State Supreme Court Justice Harold Galloway dismissed Martinez's lawsuit in August 2006, saying that the state does not recognize same-sex marriages. The state legislature ``currently defines marriage as limited to the union of one man and one woman,'' he wrote.

The appellate judges disagreed, determining that there is no legal impediment in New York to the recognition of a same-sex marriage.

The state legislature ``may decide to prohibit the recognition of same-sex marriages solemnized abroad,'' the ruling said. ``Until it does so, however, such marriages are entitled to recognition in New York.''

So- at the moment anyway, my Canadian marrige to my husband is legally valid here in New York State. What this means in a practical sense (say......could we files state tax returns together?) other than health insurance remains to be seen.

I just hope the matter isn't taken to a higher court. We all know how they ruled in regard to gay marriage two summers ago.

New York City has been recognizing legal gay marriage for a while now, but this latest decision is State wide, and will have significant consequences for those outside the City.

[Daniel]

And now....after looking in vain for more information re my last post, the NYTImes finally got its act together and put an article on it's website....hours later of course..

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/02/ny...02samesex.html

Read closely....there's a little bit of gay rights history being made.

[andrewlittle]

Jenna and I got married in England, during our one year work/study there. From the governments, insurers or businesses in Iowa, Ohio and New York there has been nary a peep. The marriage has been recognized - actually that is not an adequate word - the marriage has been assumed to be valid wherever we have lived in the U.S. since.

I say "assumed" because we have never had to so much as show our marriage certificate to be afforded the benefits of being married. How about that for heterosexual privilege - we have different last names, and yet no-one - not one single person or entity - has required proof of our marriage, not even the IRS.

Since, if I remember correctly, New York has in its non-discrimination policies "sexual orientation", this decision is both a no-brainer and a severe challenge to those who oppose same-sex marriage rights. Without first changing the non-discrimination law, how could they possibly pass a law to not recognize foreign or out of state same-sex marriage?

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by andrewlittle

I say "assumed" because we have never had to so much as show our marriage certificate to be afforded the benefits of being married. How about that for heterosexual privilege - we have different last names, and yet no-one - not one single person or entity - has required proof of our marriage, not even the IRS.

Since, if I remember correctly, New York has in its non-discrimination policies "sexual orientation", this decision is both a no-brainer and a severe challenge to those who oppose same-sex marriage rights. Without first changing the non-discrimination law, how could they possibly pass a law to not recognize foreign or out of state same-sex marriage?

I very much doubt that anything of the kind will happen. Rather, what may happen is that this latest court decision may be appealed and overturned by the state supreme court. Then, it will be up to the legistlature (where a gay marriage bill has been languishing for months now in a Republican controlled State Senate) to change the matter.

Privilege- as they say- has it's privileges.

God forbid that something should happen to Jonathan: I believe that regardless of this court's decision, I would still have to haul out the POA & HCP and take it to the hopsital to be 'recognized'. Would they recognize the Canadian marriage license? It's anybody's guess at this point.

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by Daniel

Privilege- as they say- has it's privileges.

Yes it does. Like Any & Jenna, DH and I have different last names. We have NEVER had any question raised about our marriage.

The closest we came to a question was because of our different last names. We were at the Zurich airport, and had, as usual, packed our stuff into two suitcases which we shared. The lady checking bags kept asking, But *which* bag is yours, and *which* bag is his? I said, the bags are both ours. Then she asked, So which bag has *your* items? Which bag has *his* items? I told her, both bags have items from both of us. She was SOooooo confused, until we explained we were married. And that, friends, is the biggest problem we've ever had.

I actually did worry about what might happen if the 'marriage amendment' passed here in AZ, if with different last names, we would be required to produce a copy of the marriage certificate in case of an emergency.


God forbid that something should happen to Jonathan: I believe that regardless of this court's decision, I would still have to haul out the POA & HCP and take it to the hopsital to be 'recognized'. Would they recognize the Canadian marriage license? It's anybody's guess at this point.

Shit! Yeah. I think you would want those docs with you in any emergency. I've heard horror stories you don't wanna think about, I know you can imagine them.

[mjules]

Yay! Now when April and I go to Boston to get married, it'll still count when we get back home.

[Daniel]

My friends- this is big news and a big deal. My husband and I went to Canada to force my employer to change their policy on health coverage. Guess what? Under this new directive, no one will have to do that again! The burden has been lifted off gay couples in New York. Does this mean we have full marriage? No.

But it's coming! And probably faster than we think.

When our new Governor took office, if was widely known that he was more supportive than the man before him. And to his credit, Paterson has put put his money where his mouth is on the this issue. Kudos Governor!

I am tickled pink.




http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/29/ny...agewanted=2&hp

New York Begins to Alter Policy on Gay Marriage

By JEREMY W. PETERS
Published: May 29, 2008
ALBANY — Gov. David A. Paterson has directed all state agencies to begin to revise their policies and regulations to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions, like Massachusetts, California and Canada.

In a directive issued on May 14, the governor’s legal counsel, David Nocenti, instructed the agencies that gay couples married elsewhere “should be afforded the same recognition as any other legally performed union.”

The revisions are most likely to involve as many as 1,300 statutes and regulations in New York governing everything from joint filing of income tax returns to transferring fishing licenses between spouses.

In a videotaped message given to gay community leaders at a dinner on May 17, Mr. Paterson described the move as “a strong step toward marriage equality.” And people on both sides of the issue said it moves the state closer to fully legalizing same-sex unions in this state.

“Very shortly, there will be hundreds and hundreds and hundreds, and probably thousands and thousands and thousands of gay people who have their marriages recognized by the state,” said Assemblyman Daniel O’Donnell, a Democrat who represents the Upper West Side and has pushed for legalization of gay unions.

Massachusetts and California are the only states that have legalized gay marriage, while others, including New Jersey and Vermont, allow civil unions. Forty-one states have laws limiting marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Legal experts said Mr. Paterson’s decision would make New York the only state that did not itself allow gay marriage but fully recognized same-sex unions entered into elsewhere.

The directive is the strongest signal yet that Mr. Paterson, who developed strong ties to the gay community as a legislator, plans to push aggressively to legalize same-sex unions as governor. His predecessor, Eliot Spitzer, introduced a bill last year that would have legalized gay marriage, but even as he submitted it, doubted that it would pass. The Democratic-dominated Assembly passed the measure, and the Republican-led Senate rejected it.

Short of an act by the Legislature, the directive ordered by Mr. Paterson is the one of the strongest statements a state can make in favor of gay unions.

“Basically we’ve done everything we can do on marriage legislatively at this point,” said Sean Patrick Maloney, a senior adviser to Mr. Paterson. “But there are tools in our tool kit on the executive side, and this is one.”

The directive cited a Feb. 1 ruling by a State Appellate Court in Rochester that Patricia Martinez , who works at Monroe Community College and who married her partner in Canada, could not be denied health benefits by the college because of New York’s longstanding policy of recognizing marriages performed elsewhere, even if they are not explicitly allowed under New York law. The appeals court said that New York must recognize marriages performed in other states that allow the practice and in countries that permit it, like Canada and Spain.

Monroe County filed an appeal with the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, but it was rejected on technical grounds. The county has not decided whether to file another appeal, a county spokesman said on Wednesday. The Court of Appeals has previously ruled that the state’s Constitution did not compel the recognition of same-sex marriages and that it was up to the Legislature to decide whether do so.

Groups that oppose gay marriage said the governor was essentially trying to circumvent the Legislature.

“It’s a perfect example of a governor overstepping his authority and sidestepping the democratic process,” said Brian Raum, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a national organization opposed to same-sex marriage. “It’s an issue of public policy that should be decided by the voters.”

Gay rights advocates, however, applauded Mr. Paterson, saying the broad directive would make it clear that gay couples wed in other states were entitled to all of the benefits of marriage in New York and relieve them of the burden of challenging or suing individual agencies.

“He saw no reason to stand in the way of making sure these couples benefit from the rights and protections that come with marriage,” said Susan Sommer, senior counsel for Lambda Legal, a group that advocates for gay rights. “It shouldn’t be the burden of each lesbian or gay couple to have to advocate before an agency every time a new issue comes up.”

In the directive, Mr. Nocenti wrote that state agencies should review all rules and regulations to determine whether they conflict with recognition of same-sex marriages and report back to him by June 30. Mr. Nocenti said that state agencies that did not provide “full faith and credit to same-sex marriages” could be subject to liability.

He said that many changes could be made through internal memos or policy statements, but that regulatory changes might be needed in some cases.

Mr. Nocenti directed agency heads to a list of state regulations and statutes that were likely to need overhaul, including measures affecting a spouse’s ability to collect a deceased spouse’s pension and to inherit public housing.

In addition to conferring more rights on gay couples, the changes might also require more responsibilities. For example, the order that required certain employees of the executive branch to file financial disclosure documents for their spouses would also apply to gay spouses.

It is less clear what the directive means for state policies that are not enforced by state agencies but by the courts, like those that govern child custody or protect a husband and wife from having to testify against one another about statements they made to each other while married.

Coincidentally, Mr. Nocenti’s directive was dated one day before the California Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. Gay marriage proponents said they expected that ruling, which will take effect in mid-June unless the court grants a stay, will lead some gay couples in New York to marry in California so they can take advantage of the protections under New York law.

Of course, many gay New Yorkers might find Canada to be a more convenient option, some gay rights supporters pointed out. Mr. Nocenti also said that marriages performed in Massachusetts should be recognized in New York, though Massachusetts, unlike California, does not permit gay residents from other states to be married there if their home state prohibits same-sex unions.

While gay rights advocates widely praised the spirit of the Mr. Paterson’s policy, some saw more than a little irony in the fact that New York has yet to allow gays to marry.

“If you’re going to treat us as equals, why don’t you just give us the marriage license?” said Alan Van Capelle, executive director of Empire State Pride Agenda. “So this is a temporary but necessary fix for a longer-term problem, which is marriage equality in New York State.”

Danny Hakim contributed reporting.

[Zerbie]

Ohhh good. It grieved me to hear about what a struggle it was to get J recognized for your health insurance. I hope this sort of struggle will soon be a thing of the past for other couples.

Thanks, Daniel. It is good to read good news.

[Vanessa White]

I did not know that the new governor was so positive toward the LGBT community, in terms of marriage equality anyway. What a tremendous relief for so many, and a huge step forward for so many more!!!!!!

[tdogg]

And to add to Daniel's great news! The headlines yesterday in California - Gays married in California will have their marriages recognized in New York!!!

Am I being too optimistic in believing that things are changing in warp speed for us, here and now? It truly seems that in the last few days positive news is everyone. Our progress toward full equality is gaining momentum, let's not let it slow down!

[Daniel]

Every great story has a backstory- and this one is a wonderful one- how and why the the Covernor of NY came to take action.

Tdogg- thanks for you great news!

How Governor Set His Stance on Gay Rights

Todd Heisler/The New York Times
Gov. David A. Paterson speaking in his Manhattan office on Thursday about his directive on recognizing gay marriage.

By JEREMY W. PETERS and DANNY HAKIM
Published: May 30, 2008
When David A. Paterson was growing up and his parents would go out of town, he and his little brother would stay in Harlem with family friends they called Uncle Stanley and Uncle Ronald.

Uncle Stanley and Uncle Ronald, he said, were a gay couple, though in the 1960s few people described them that way. They helped young David with his spelling, and read to him and played cards with him.

“Apparently, my parents never thought we were in any danger,” the governor recalled on Thursday in an interview. “I was raised in a culture that understood the different ways that people conduct their lives. And I feel very proud of it.”

Mr. Paterson, who two months ago was unexpectedly elevated to be governor of New York, has accepted gay men and lesbians since early in life. From his first run for office, in 1985, he reached out to gays and lesbians, and in 1994, long before gay rights groups were broadly pushing for it, he said he supported same-sex marriage.

As he rose in politics, he became a go-between in the occasionally strained relationship between gay and black residents in his district and beyond, using his easygoing manner to broker disagreements and soothe hurt feelings.

On Thursday, the governor, who is still largely unknown to many New Yorkers, appealed to them to recognize what he called the basic common sense of allowing gay men and lesbians married elsewhere to gain the same rights here as heterosexual couples.

In doing so, he is stepping to the forefront of an issue that has often tripped up his party nationally, and he is going further than either of the two Democratic presidential candidates have been willing to do.

“People who live together for a long time would like to be married — as far as I’m concerned, I think it’s beautiful,” he said in a news conference called to discuss his directive to state agencies to revise their regulations to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions, like California.

“I think it’s fine, regardless of the tenets of religion or the beliefs of some,” he added. “It’s something that the government should allow for people. It’s maybe misunderstood in this generation.”

But already on Thursday, there were signs of a backlash against his decision, with some conservative groups mulling whether to mount a legal challenge to the directive. Some Republican legislators said that Mr. Paterson is wading into an issue that should be settled by the Legislature, and likened it to the ill-fated attempt by his predecessor, Eliot Spitzer, to grant driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants without seeking legislative support.

“It’s outrageous that the governor did what he did,” said Michael Long, chairman of the state’s Conservative Party. “He’s for same-sex marriage, that’s fine. I have no problem with that. To do this in the dark of night, through the back door, to begin the process of destroying the sanctity of marriage, is really wrong.”

It was shortly after Mr. Paterson was sworn in, on March 17, that his legal counsel, David Nocenti, approached him to discuss a February appellate court ruling in Rochester. In that case, the court said that because of New York’s longstanding practice of recognizing marriages from other jurisdictions, a community college in Monroe County must provide health benefits to the wife of a woman who was married in Canada.

Mr. Nocenti recommended that Mr. Paterson order all state agencies to bring their policies in line with that decision.

Mr. Paterson quickly agreed to do so, not only because the state risked legal exposure if it did not, but also because such a directive would be a strong statement of principle about an issue he cares about deeply. He met with his inner circle, and there was no dissent.

On May 14, Mr. Nocenti’s memo went out to the agencies. The governor’s plan called for not publicizing the directive until after June 30, when the agencies were asked to report back to Mr. Nocenti with the revisions necessary to comply with the court ruling. Once the governor approved those changes, he planned to announce them publicly. But Mr. Nocenti’s memo was reported on Wednesday night by The New York Times, and the governor described its contents at a dinner with gay advocates on May 17.

In the interview, Mr. Paterson said he believes deeply that gay men and lesbians today face the same kind of civil rights battle that black Americans faced. He acknowledged that this position put him at odds with some black leaders, who bristle at such comparisons.

“In many respects, people in our society, we only recognize our own struggles,” Mr. Paterson said. “I’ve wanted to be someone in the African-American community who recognizes the new civil rights struggle that is being undertaken by gay and lesbian and transgendered people.”

When Mr. Paterson became governor, gay activists cheered, saying they would have an ally in Albany even more committed than Mr. Spitzer. The Web site of The Advocate, a gay magazine, ran a story headlined, “Could Spitzer’s woes have a silver lining?” The story called Mr. Paterson “the best-case scenario for gays and lesbians in the state.”

Mr. Paterson introduced the State Senate’s first hate crimes bill in the 1980s and refused to support a compromise that did not include gay men and lesbians. When the Senate ultimately agreed to pass a hate crimes bill in 2000, it marked the first time the phrase “sexual orientation” appeared in New York State laws.

Mr. Paterson, then a senator, said: “Now I can die in peace,” adding, “If nothing else ever happens here, I feel that I can point to a contribution that I made.”

During his years as minority leader of the Senate, from 2002 to 2006, his warm relations with the majority leader, Joseph L. Bruno, a Republican, helped pave the way for laws extending civil rights protections to gay men and lesbians, and coincided with a softening of Mr. Bruno’s views on gay rights.

“From the get-go, when I first introduced marriage, which was in, like, 2001, he put his name down right away as a sponsor,” said Senator Tom Duane, a Manhattan Democrat and the only openly gay member of the Senate. “The second I asked him if he wanted to be a sponsor, he said yes. When he was minority leader, he also fought for funding for groups and he’s been great on H.I.V./AIDS issues, as well. He has been 100 percent behind us.”

Some lawmakers said they particularly admired Mr. Paterson’s position on gay marriage because it would have been easy for him to let the issue rest once he became governor.

“I just think it shows the steel in his spine,” said Assemblyman Micah Z. Kellner, a Democrat who represents the Upper East Side. “He knows he is now the governor of all people in New York State, gay and straight.”

Mr. Paterson said he does not see his support for gay marriage as an issue of political fortitude, but rather something more human and almost reflexive.

“All the time when I’d hear Uncle Stanley and Uncle Ronald and my parents talk, they were talking about the civil rights struggle,” Mr. Paterson said. “In those days, I knew I wanted to grow up and feel that I could change something.”

[matthewspeed]

Originally Posted by BrentRichards

I always tell my drag queen friends that I want to see a "drag race" instead of a pageant ... gun goes off and off they go in spike heels, big hair, screaming and swinging purses ... yeehah! Great image.

Brent,

Our Gay Pride in Cincinnati has "Drag Racing." The queens get all fancied up and start at a particular bar. They start with a cocktail and run to the next bar, drink, then run to the next, drink, etc... They have to have on their heels, of course. I'm not sure if every major gay pride event has this sort of thing, but I'm sure it is not uncommon. Have to love our diversity!