|
....March 4, 11:28 AM |
| Down The Aisle: The Gay Marriage Debate
By Azi Paybarah and Aaron Rutkoff Nearly a year after getting married, Brendan Fay said the honeymoon magic has dimmed, and the person he’s committed to “until death do us part” refers to his homemade Irish stew as a mere bowl of soup.
“And we go through that all the time,” said Fay of the kitchen banter he’s grown accustomed to from his spouse, Tom Moulton. Fay said although he and Moulton have their differences – “I’m a coffee person. Tom is an orange juice person” – they are like any other married couple. The Astoria couple wed last July in a civil ceremony in Canada, making them one of the first gay couples in America to have their relationship recognized by a government, even if it was not their own. Now, with a Constitutional amendment on the table that would ban gay marriages, and a mayor in upstate New York performing them, the controversy over the issue has been ignited in Queens, with elected officials, activists and members of the gay and lesbian community weighing in. Reading Between The Lines This week, in a press release responding to the growing controversy surrounding gay marriages around the country and in New York, State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said that same-sex marriages should be recognized, but not performed in the state. “[R]eference to ‘bride and groom’ and ‘husband and wife’ [in state marriage law] – does not authorize the issuance of licenses to same sex couples in New York,” explained a legal opinion issued by Spitzer’s officer. The Domestic Marriage Law, the state regulation for official matrimony, “does not explicitly prohibit same-sex marriages, [but] it is our view that the Legislature did not intend to authorize same-sex marriage,” the statement said. Although he acknowledged that the issue “must and will be decided by the courts,” Spitzer went on to argue that “same sex marriages and civil unions lawfully entered in other jurisdictions outside the state should be recognized in New York.” Current Rules Currently in New York City, there is no recognition of same-sex marriages or civil unions. However, couples residing together of any gender can register as domestic partners and receive health benefits. In North America, same-sex couples can be married only in San Francisco and in two Canadian provinces – Ontario and British Columbia. In the upstate village of New Paltz, Mayor Jason West performed two dozen same-sex marriages this week, but he was later served with a summons for the misdemeanor offense of solemnizing false marriages. Prior to the March 3 opinion by Spitzer, West said he would continue to officiate at same-sex weddings. In Canada, same-sex marriages licensed in Ontario and British Colombia are not recognized nationwide, Fay said. Interestingly, although the residency requirement for same-sex marriages has been waived in Canada, a one-year residency requirement is still required in order to divorced. “It’s a serious matter,” Fay observed. “One of us would have to live in Canada for a year [if we wanted] to get divorced.” In the U.S., statewide recognition for civil unions, a status legally similar to marriage, is only offered in Vermont. Fay said getting married has to become easier for same-sex couples. “Why should couples from Queens have to figure out a way to get to Toronto, San Francisco or New Paltz? We need political leaders to take a stand, this is one of those historical moments.” Taking up that call, City Council Speaker Gifford Miller this week disagreed with Spitzer’s legal findings because “state law refers to a husband and wife. It does not state man or a woman.” Despite the opinion from the second highest elected official in the city, Patrick Synmoie, the general counsel for the City Clerk’s office, said no same-sex marriage licenses will be issued. “We don’t think by law we are allowed to do so,” he explained. A Federal Issue? In the wake of a Massachusetts Supreme Court decision calling for nothing less than full gay marriage in the state, and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom’s decision to defy his state’s law and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, President George Bush formally endorsed a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. “If we are to prevent the meaning of marriage from being changed forever, our nation must enact a Constitutional Amendment to protect marriage in America,” Bush said on Feb. 24. “Decisive and democratic action is needed, because attempts to redefine marriage in a single state or city could have serious consequences throughout the country.” Every member of the Queens congressional delegation said they would vote no on such a proposal, according to the Empire State Pride Agenda. Congressman Gregory Meeks explained the difference his view and the Bush’s. “I am against the president’s Constitutional Amendment…I would vote no,” he said. “It’s a state decision. I’m for civil unions.” |
|
Water Rate Hike Town Hall Meeting FDNY Implements New Dispatch System Two Arrested In Internet Sting Hit-And-Run Driver Turns Himself In Media Piracy Penalties Stiffened Budget Halts College Services Classic Picasso Prints On Display Harassed Tenants Building Support Treatment Lessens Side Effects Youth Baseball Conflicts Queens Mets And Amazing Schools: City Announces Rockaway Ferry 30th Candidates Squabble Over Details Water Board Blasted For Rate Hike Supermarket Stiffs Baggers Katz Has Baby Boy New Bank Offers Loans To The Poor Senate Approves Summer Gas-Tax Suspense Queens Inaugurates Its Jazz Orchestra New Treatment Battles Epilepsy City Provides Youth With Summer Jobs Queens Air Gets an ‘F’ Report Says Acquittals Cap Dramatic Bell Trial | |||||||
|
|||||||||
