Gay couples cheered by supporters have begun marrying in New York City on the first day same-sex weddings are legal in the Empire State.
New York City officials expect to host hundreds of same-sex weddings today.
Clerks in New York City and about a dozen other cities state-wide are opening their doors to cater to same-sex couples.
In Manhattan, the first of about 100 couples waiting in line on a sweltering day began exchanging vows in a city clerk’s office.
Judges waived a mandatory 24-hour waiting period that allowed couples to exchange vows moments after receiving their licences.
A small number of same-sex couples got married at the stroke of midnight around the state.
Let's see how long it takes to get to California. Watching all of our straight friends who have been together for less time than we have get married again and again is starting to get old, especially since half of them have already divorced.
Wonderful news that New York has joined the growing list of places around the world which recognise gay relationships to be equal to straight ones. If only the rest of the US could be as open-minded as the people of New York City. New York is an example of what conservative America could be, if only it had the courage and was not so influenced by puritanical religious views.
In a related story, scientists have confirmed that there are gay lemmings, too
Would that make same sex marriage like jumping off into hell wail Satan stabs them with a pitch fork in their rear end?
Scientists have also confirmed that there are 5000 other species that have same sex too.
Our local paper featured a picture of the very first couple - an elderly pair of ladies that had been together for 23 years. Pretty neat.
It is good news for those involved but it also will open up another issue regarding prenuptial agreements, spousal support, divorce litigation and child custody cases. Its great they have this opportunity but at the same time they will inherit the high cost of breaking up as well.
Buzzfeed has a bunch of beautiful pictures of some of the first couples to get married:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/portrait … n-new-york
The joy and love just leap off the screen.
I don't quite know why, but for me those pics from buzz conjure up images of Sodom and Gomorrah. The descent continues...
yeah, you can see the evil intent and Satan lurking behind the love and happiness
Mr. Greek, is that avatar of yours suppose to be Aristotle? Plato?
Perhaps before you post a thought you might want to first ask yourself if it would meet the high expectations of those two in the area of "logic". You see Mr. Greek, gays receiving a marriage certificate cannot possibly increase the aspect of love and/or happiness in their lives . It's just a piece of paper conveying an abstract thought. No one was preventing gays from loving or achieving any kind of happiness they wanted with their mate. The whole and entire intent of the marriage certificate for these guys is to reap financial rewards from the state - monies that should be going to more worthy causes. And yes, I know, more $$$ can give people "happiness." But I don't think you meant it that way. Hence, the illogic of your use of "love" and "happiness."
Your logic would seem to apply to the heterosexual couple in just the same ways. Perhaps we would all be better off by eliminating official notice of marriages all together?
I would question the financial rewards from the state, though - states just love successful couples with no children. They provide much more of the states tax income than single people or couples with children on a per capita basis.
For any homosexual who want to get married here is some places to go. You only have to show a certificate that you were born gay,
Canada, Sweden, Norway, Netherlands (Holland) Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Iceland began to South Africa Mexico City, Mexico, Argentina
The United States
New Hampshire, New York Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, and Vermont, and Washington, DC. California
"Your logic would seem to apply to the heterosexual couple in just the same ways"
I disagree. My interpretation of a marriage certificate, its primary purpose, is to cement a legal binding agreement upon two people who would, under normal circumstances, produce children. The marriage license is a de facto K. At least thats the way I see it. Two people (capable of reproducing offspring) , agree to stay together primarily for the purpose of providing a stable environment for their children...until they reach adulthood. Gays hv no such burden raising children. For example, when I hv my first child, I am going to hv to set money aside for his football, hockey stick, etc. If its a girl, I'm going to hv to buy her dolls and dresses and a training bra, etc. All these expenses and obligations , among many more, are vacant from the lives of gays. Societies do not exit because of gays. They exist in spite of them.
You have a very skewed interpretation. A marriage license is to provide legal obligations, responsibilities and duties to, for and from each spouse.
Nowhere in that certificate are children mentioned.
The certificate also gives rise, outside of itself, to obligations and rights such as next-of-kin, inheritance, insurance and others. None of those rights or obligations require children, either.
Children's rights to certain things from their parents arise from biology, not from a marriage certificate or ceremony. Indeed, those rights exist completely separate from such a certificate, even to the point that if the parents are not married they still have the same responsibilities to children.
Thanks, you just saved me a lengthy reply.
Leretseh's "interpretation" also completely ignores the many heterosexual couples who are unable or unwilling to have children, as well as the many homosexual couples who DO have children.
Wow and to think that all these years I was of the misconception that two people got married simply because they loved each other and wanted to be together for the rest of their lives. What a fool, I've been !!!! OMG what will my friends do?? Those who married and either decided not to have children or found out they couldn't?? Alas, alack!! Woe is me !!!
without delving into your arguments in detail, i would just want to say that it probably isn't an effective idea to bring up the habits of ancient Greeks when arguing against homosexuality lol
Good to see America joining this century in tolerance.
Now all that's needed to do is catch up with the rest of the world by providing free national health care!
Not without a license and a certificate that you were born mono sexual,
What about my advanced Multiple Personality Disorder? Does that count as being monosexual?
klarawieckYour funny, let me try to imagine something
If your doctor can certified that one of multi personallelaties is a stable adult, identifiable and could make a good future parent, next step
If you can find about 5% of the Country’s population that has your same condition without being called a mental illness too much so , they will consider the next step.
Once that 5% has been confirmed, that is the beginning of a new seat in the government with a budget to support their ass.. Look at gays; it took thousands of years at 10% of the population to change their rule.
Final: If you have the stubborn passion and these results, you can do anything in a democracy,
I know I started two new industries, although they can retract anytime, like they did with me and called my sand sculptor profession too unique and ruin my job and my country’s established profession of 34 years. By way of tax structure yet my government loves to keeps funding lots of dead artist
The dead needs our support too.
You're right though... It would take a while to make my ONE dream come true. (sighs)
"You have a very skewed interpretation."
I will defer to mR. Humpty Dumpty:
`I don't know what you mean by "glory,"' Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. `Of course you don't -- till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'
`But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument,"' Alice objected.
`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master - - that's all.'
Oh, I understood that all right - you wish to redefine the meaning of a particular concept. I'm just not quite sure why you would wish to make that new definition public as it exists only in your own mind,
I only point out, just in case you didn't understand, that your definition is skewed from what the accepted meaning is - that it doesn't really matter what you define a word to mean in your own mind as most people will still use it in the generally accepted manner.
When you take it upon yourself to redefine words to have a new and unusual meaning it makes communication more difficult but in this case I understood that it was only your personal definition that you were giving.
Hmmm. I see my there as the inquisitive little Alice. Not the bully Dumpty. Those who wish to continue to tinker (Bruce , you paying attention here) with the meaning of words, for their own selfish financial benefits, are bullies.
While I took it as Dumpty!
Ah, the vagaries of perception in language and communication! At least it keeps life interesting.
I completely took you for Dumpty, bullying gays by playing with the definition of words for your own (emotional? spritiual?) gain.
Truly, I have to laugh at two people with such a complete and total failure to communicate with simple words.
Recognition of marriage for sodomizing males and scissoring females ... I am against. What they do behind closed doors is their own business. The sole purpose to get official recognition for their peculiar lifestyle is to bullying public monies to be used to support them. It's bullying…
And if I can add a little humor in your otherwise hum drum existence, wild one,well, bully for you
Don't get me wrong - I'm laughing at least as much at myself as at our conversation or at you. Just a skewed sense of humor, maybe.
No, that's not the purpose of gay marriage, and if you would investigate more thoroughly, setting aside your own prejudices, you would know that. It is a popular "reason" being promoted by the anti-gay crowd, but has little to nothing to do with actual reasons.
I have to ask, though, how getting married will gain public funds to support anyone at all? I always find that being married costs more in taxes than if the couple was single and can't think of much else. It may result in being able to get medical insurance through a spouses employer, and could end up with a spouse getting a small SS payment after a death but for the life of me I can't see a reason to deny that to any couple making a household together.
"sodomizing males and scissoring females"
My local paper had a photo of the first couple to be married in NY - two elderly ladies, one in a wheelchair, that have been together for 23 years. Far longer than the average heterosexual couple and I doubt that they have participated in the sex act for years. They just love each other at 76 and 85 years old
ABC news photo: http://abcnews.go.com/US/slideshow/sex- … e-14153047
These are the people that your offensive language refers to. Does it make you proud?
One of my dream is to be in an old age couple lifestyle
I don't think it will be with the same sex, yet all the same
"These are the people that your offensive language refers to. "
WOW! So gay people's sexual activity you find OFFENSIVE?! What a Freudian slip THAT was.
wilderness, the elderly people were there for a photo shoot dude. For the females ... They eat that kind of stuff up (some emasculated males too). Cutesy... Ah, look how long they were made to wait...to achieve true love and happiness. BUNK . Like I keep saying, and you keep deliberately ignoring, its about money dude. That’s’ all this stuff is about.
If it came down to a choice of money or a lifetime of ultimate love
I'll take the love, thank you
No - just your language.
I figured that would be your response - just a fake photo for publicity.
It's not so funny anymore, just pathetic and offensive.
Never said it was fake. You know that. As for the rest of your post...LAME. Like the guy who is ONE move from checkmate and rather than concede ... he leaves the board. That my friend is pathetic
I prefer the life game of Tit-for-Tat: A Simple Strategy for Life serves as a useful metaphor for many types also both intriguing and unconventional. ...
Chess would be too bully for me, yet have no fear for bullies because of tit for tat will win out in the end
Although New York has passed the gay marriage, from what I read it still issues because it's not recognized federally. Example - someone who is gay wants to marry someone from France, well their partner will be not given the same access to a visa as a straight couple. So there is still some work that needs to be done.
I once dated a woman from France who wanted to marry me to get her green card into Canada. I told her I was not ready, so she found this gay guy in Quebec to marry, and he wanted to live in France to be with his boyfriend.
What a crazy World
by Felixedet20005 years ago
What do you think about the promotion of same sex marriage?The adoption of this pattern of marriage is also a source of concerns to various stake holders in the religious and political circles.What is you say in all...
by mdawson177 years ago
In the recent years I have seen more men come out of the closet after being married for more than 5 years. This concerns me becuase I think of the spouse that has dedicated her complete life to him!I have seen children...
by Homez786 years ago
My partner and I are in a same sex relationship, and will have been together 10 years this year.We are what I would class as, in a "stable" relationship, have our own house, good jobs, and security.We decided...
by Brian6 years ago
I just returned from Chicago's gay pride week, where I marched along with my friends from Campit Resort from Saugatuck, Michigan. We were float #173 of 250 floats. Gay protesters slashed the tires of 50 floats, thinking...
by mbuggieh4 years ago
The Supreme Court is poised to rule on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). What is your opinion(s) on this issue? What are the sources of your opinion(s)?
by Cathy Nerujen4 years ago
I have been seeing more and more same sex couples (women) listing themselves as being married on Facebook. Perhaps it has always been there and I have just discovered it. Is it a new thing? A new or growing trend? Is it...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.