?

Log in

NY Supreme Court: Gays Must Be Allowed To Marry - The Life and Thoughts of Zach

Feb. 4th, 2005

01:45 pm - NY Supreme Court: Gays Must Be Allowed To Marry

Previous Entry Share Next Entry

What a crazy time we live in. Just last night I was reading a Press Release about the legal troubles that Green Party Mayor of New Paltz, New York Jason West has been involved in since he's been performing gay marriages. This morning I read an article in the latest Slingshot (the issue I was reading #84 is not online yet) calling for radicals to perform "polyamorous gender traitorous orgies in the streets" as a diversionary tactic so that the folks fighting for gay marriage would be seen as the moderate mainstream compromise position rather than the radical position. This afternoon wendywoohoo posts this great news!

From ABC:
(New York -WABC, February 4, 2005) — We have breaking news. According to Lambda Legal, which filed a lawsuit on behalf of same-sex couples, a New York State Supreme Court judge has ruled same sex couples must be allowed to marry.

A spokesman for the court system has confirmed that a ruling has been issued in the landmark case on gay marriages in New York.

Lambda Legal called it "a historic ruling that delivers the state Constitution's promise of equality to all New Yorkers."

Susan Sommer, supervising attorney at Lambda Legal and the lead attorney on the case, added that "The court recognized that unless gay people can marry, they are not being treated equally under the law. Same-sex couples need the protections and security marriage provides, and this ruling says they're entitled to get them the same way straight couples do."
EDIT - Note that in New York state the "supreme court" is NOT the highest court in the land, it is more like a "circuit court". There are still 1 or 2 levels of appeals available in this case.
 

Comments:

[User Picture]
From:szasz
Date:February 4th, 2005 11:50 am (UTC)
(Link)
That's a rather narrow, atypical, stereotyping, and generally unhelpful use of the term "polyamorous." They should know better.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:juniperesque
Date:February 4th, 2005 11:56 am (UTC)
(Link)
Just what I was about to say.

Let's not smear the poly people.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:zarfmouse
Date:February 4th, 2005 12:06 pm (UTC)
(Link)
See my reply to szasz below. I don't think the article in Slingshot was meant as a smear OR as a generalization. It was calling (tongue in cheek, sarcastically) for a very specific kind of radical sexual event using a string of independent adjectives. None of those adjectives should have been taken to be generalizations of the other adjectives. It was just good fun hyperbolic prose.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:zarfmouse
Date:February 4th, 2005 12:29 pm (UTC)
(Link)
And in many ways the point of including the term "polyamorous" was specifically to draw out the point that poly folks won't be able to marry as groups even if gay folks win that right. The true radical position on gay marriage ought to include marriage equality for poly folks as well.

(again with all the caveats that the author knows full well that poly people aren't by definition gender traitorous or orgiastic or exhibitionist. But there's nothing stopping someone from being ALL of those things including poly. Politically motivated radical wingnut orgies in the streets ought to be done with love and compassion...hence the poly.)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:zarfmouse
Date:February 4th, 2005 12:04 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I don't think they meant to describe those activities as the end all and be all of polyamory. There was a string of adjectives and in the context of the article (by a self-described fringe radical wingnut) these were all very positive adjectives.

A gender traitorous radical orgy in the streets COULD be polyamorous and this author was calling for one that was. That doesn't imply that the author thinks all poly people engage in gender traitorous orgies in the streets, or that poly people are gender traitorous, or that poly people engage in orgies, or any other less constrained combination of the features of the event that the author was describing.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:zarfmouse
Date:February 4th, 2005 12:11 pm (UTC)
(Link)
For more context, the author of the Slingshot article was saying that radical wingnuts should advocate for what we REALLY want rather than for what we think we can get. In doing so a side effect is that the more moderate activists have more bargaining power because they are seen as more moderate, the right can't villify them as being the definition of left wing looney if there's left wing loonies out there really going for the gold. The article was being a bit hyperbolic but it made a very good point about the role of a fringe radical minority in helping to expand the parameters of the debate and create a middle space.

I'm proud to be a left wing looney.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]
From:zorbtrauts
Date:February 4th, 2005 11:56 am (UTC)
(Link)
Not even an apellate court. The Supreme Court in New York is the lowest court.

Unfortunately, this will have several opportunities to be overturned.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:zarfmouse
Date:February 4th, 2005 12:08 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Well it looks like from the org chart that the first level of appeals is ALSO called the "supreme court - appellate division" and then the highest level of appeals is the "Court of Appeals". So I don't know if there's 1 or 2 appeals available but there are definitely appeals available.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:arun251
Date:February 4th, 2005 10:25 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Talk about a misnomer!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]
From:zarfmouse
Date:February 4th, 2005 12:12 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I actually realized about the court structure thing as I was reposting elsewhere. Great minds think alike because I came back here and after I made the edit I saw your comments. :)

I have no idea if there are now 1 or 2 levels of appeal left.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:tugena13
Date:February 4th, 2005 12:22 pm (UTC)
(Link)
great news!

also...

This morning I read an article in the latest Slingshot (the issue I was reading #84 is not online yet) calling for radicals to perform "polyamorous gender traitorous orgies in the streets" as a diversionary tactic so that the folks fighting for gay marriage would be seen as the moderate mainstream compromise position rather than the radical position.

bwahahaha... i LOVE that plan!

(Reply) (Thread)