Posted on 07/06/2006 12:54:02 PM PDT by longtermmemmory
Dean calls justification used in New York ruling on gay marriage 'bigoted, outdated' Today in New York:
New York's highest court today turned back a broad attempt by gay and lesbian couples across the state to win the right to marry and raise children under New York State's marriage law, saying that denying marriage to same-sex couples does not violate the state constitution. In a 4-2 decision, the Court of Appeals found that the state's definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman, enacted more than a century ago, could have a rational basis, and that it was up to the State Legislature, not the courts, to decide whether it should be changed.
Governor Dean responded to the decision in a written statement, saying:
As Democrats, we believe that every American has a right to equal protection under the law and to live in dignity. And we must respect the right of every family to live in dignity with equal rights, responsibilities and protections under the law. Today's decision by the New York Court of Appeals, which relies on outdated and bigoted notions about families, is deeply disappointing, but it does not end the effort to achieve this goal. As that essential process moves forward, it is up to the State legislature to act to protect the equal rights of every New Yorker and for the debate on how to ensure those rights to proceed without the rancor and divisiveness that too often surrounds this issue.
According to the National Stonewall Democrats, New York Democrats may be on their way towards achieving that goal:
The New York State Democratic Party overwhelmingly passed a resolution in 2003 that calls for marriage recognition for same sex couples in the state. Additionally, the majority of New Yorkers support marriage equality according to a recent poll released in April. Gubernatorial nominee and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer is one of a number of leading Democrats in New York who has pledged to work with the state legislature to pass legislation granting marriage equality to same-sex couples.
Thanks for response - I didn't know many of the details.
Understood!
Hey Nakita, how's that NASCAR drive goin?? He may turn NY red??
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Keep 'em talking...
Insulting the very people he's been trying to court. And in an election year, no less.
Keep the hits coming, Dean. You are winning the hearts and minds of millions . . . . of Europeans.
could it be they are so desperate for money that they HAVE to abandon 98% of the population in favor of the more gullable homosexuals?
Not to worry. The GOP will maintain its hold on the Congress.
Whining and moaning and complaining is not a plan for America.
Keep smiling. :)
same result in GA with same reasoning. It is not for the courts to overide the legislature or the vote of the people.
The GA courts undid the judges overreach. They simply put back the vote of the people to make the law.
I guess he didn't read the NYT's spin on the decision.
"Gay rights" have passed their high water mark and will not be much of an issue in 10 years. "Marriage" was really a bridge too far.
But it was never about the 2% of the population that prefers "that".
Gay rights rose to prominence because the underlying principle - it's right to f*** whoever you want, whenever you want - becme very popular with those who prefer the company of the opposite sex.
I recommend that the Dems run on the sodomy platform. It fits in with the baby-killing plank as a part of a platform crying out to heaven for vengeance.
Of course. But being a liberal means not having to live by the rules, even if they're the laws of nature.
Howard Dean-The gift that just keeps on giving.
Here are some great questions for Ted Kennedy:
Hey Ted! You say it's bigotry to oppose homo relationships. Well, we all know for a fact that you've had sex with a large number of, um, "partners". Given that around half the population is male, shouldn't around half of your dozens, or perhaps hundreds, of sex "partners" have been male? Statistically speaking, that should be true, shouldn't it? By your own description, opposition to homo behavior is nothing but bigotry. So can we assume that roughly half of your sexual bedmates over the years have been men? If not, why weren't they? Are you a bigot? Do you only consider females when you get that, um, urge that you're so famous for?
Using simple math and the law of averages, how could you possibly have had so many sexual trysts without bedding at least a few men? The only possible way would be if you just don't like men sexually. But isn't that just hateful, ugly, discriminatory bigotry on your part? It's shocking...truly shocking...to find such bigotry emanating from someone in a position of authority. How do you know you wouldn't enjoy giving and receiving anal sodomy from another man if you haven't tried it? After all, it's just as good as heterosexual activity, right? It's perfectly normal, right? So give it a try and report back to us.
Otherwise, we'll be forced to conclude that Mary Jo Kopechne died from your anti-homosexual bigotry, not just your misogyny, drunkenness, cowardice, self-absorption, self-indulgence, stupidity, and arrogance, as has already been established.
"Is Dean gay??? Does he have gay kids or a gay wife??"
Good questions, Suzy! You never see him with his wife or his kids -- makes one wonder!
He probably isn't gay, but why do non-gay people scream about wanting gay marriage???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.