The trouble wh gay marriage

Contents:

• THE GAY PEOPLE AGAST GAY MARRIAGE
• GAY MARRIAGE
• CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR
• JTICE ALO TAK AIM AT GAY MARRIAGE 'POLILLY CHARGED SPEECH'
• SHOULD GAY MARRIAGE BE LEGAL?
• GOP LAWMAKER ATTEND GAY SON'S WEDDG 3 DAYS AFTER VOTG AGAST SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

THE GAY PEOPLE AGAST GAY MARRIAGE

A send lg will be ma on the legaly of California's gay marriage while favourable lgs will spark celebratns among pro-marriage supporters across the US, some gay men and women will stead see as a victory for a patriarchal stutn that bears no historil relevance to lbians are opposed to marriage on femist grounds, says Cldia Card, a profsor of philosophy at the Universy of Wisns-Madison, bee they see as an stutn that serv the terts of men more than women. And the ntrary views are not often the UK, Daily Mail lumnist Andrew Pierce says that for speakg out agast gay marriage the past, he has been attacked as a homophobe and Uncle Tom, spe a long history of champng gay strongly believ that civil partnerships - troduced 2005 to give same-sex upl equal legal rights - are enough. A webse lled Homovox featured 12 gay men and women opposed to , wh some of them cg a belief that children benef most om oppose-sex many years, the nservative stutn of marriage was never on the gay mpaign agenda, says activist Yasm Nair, who -found a group provotively named Agast Equaly.

GAY MARRIAGE

But beme an objective the early 1990s - regretfully, her view - when the movement emerged om the seismic shock of the Aids epimic, pleted of polil gay people who are favour of same-sex marriage believe anythg short of marriage is not rarely hear arguments agast by gay people themselv, says Stampp Corb, publisher of magaze LGBT Weekly, who se strong parallels wh the civil rights movement.

I don’t thk there is an issue that is a tougher issue for people to stand up agast Amerin culture today than this one, both om the standpot of the mastream media and the popular culture nmng you for your – they n e all sorts of words to scribe you – tolerant, bigot, homophobe, hater. Early Years: Same-Sex Marriage Bans In 1970, jt one year after the historic Stonewall Rts that galvanized the gay rights movement, law stunt Richard Baker and librarian Jam McConnell applied for a marriage license Gerald Nelson rejected their applitn bee they were a same-sex uple, and a trial urt upheld his cisn.

CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR

” This lg effectively blocked feral urts om lg on same-sex marriage for s, leavg the cisn solely the hands of stat, which alt blow after blow to those hopg to see gay marriage beg 1973, for stance, Maryland beme the first state to create a law that explicly f marriage as a unn between a man and woman, a belief held by many nservative relig groups. In 1989, the San Francis Board of Supervisors passed an ordance that allowed homosexual upl and unmarried heterosexual upl to register for domtic partnerships, which granted hospal visatn rights and other years later, the District of Columbia siarly passed a new law that allowed same-sex upl to register as domtic partners.

C., 1993, the hight urt Hawaii led that a ban on same-sex marriage may vlate that state nstutn’s Equal Protectn Clse—the first time a state urt has ever ched toward makg gay marriage Hawaii Supreme Court sent the se—brought by a gay male uple and two lbian upl who were nied marriage licens 1990—back for further review to the lower First Circu Court, which 1991 origally dismissed the the state tried to prove that there was “pellg state tert” jtifyg the ban, the se would be tied up ligatn for the next three Defense of Marriage Act Opponents of gay marriage, however, did not s on their hnch. That is, even if a state ma gay marriage legal, same-sex upl still wouldn’t be able to file e tax jotly, sponsor spo for immigratn benefs or receive spoal Social Secury payments, among many other act was a huge setback for the marriage equaly movement, but transient good news arose three months later: Hawaii Judge Kev S. Phg for Change: Civil Unns The next saw a whirlwd of activy on the gay marriage ont, begng wh the year 2000 when Vermont beme the first state to legalize civil unns, a legal stat that provis most of the state-level benefs of years later, Massachetts beme the first state to legalize gay marriage when the Massachetts Supreme Court led that same-sex upl had the right to marry Goodridge v.

For the first time the untry’s history, voters (rather than judg or legislators) Mae, Maryland, and Washgton approved Constutnal amendments permtg same-sex marriage marriage also beme a feral issue 2010, Massachetts, the first state to legalize gay marriage, found Sectn 3 of DOMA—the part of the 1996 law that fed marriage as a unn between one man and one woman—to be unnstutnal. Wdsor, nservative Jtice Anthony Kennedy sid wh Jtic Ruth Bar Gsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan favor of same-sex marriage rights, ultimately makg gay marriage legal across the natn June this time, was still outlawed only 13 stat, and more than 20 other untri had already legalized gay marriage, startg wh the Netherlands December 2000.

JTICE ALO TAK AIM AT GAY MARRIAGE 'POLILLY CHARGED SPEECH'

They clud Judh Kasen-Wdsor, widow of gay rights activist Edie Wdsor; Matthew Hayn, -owner of Club Q, the LGBTQ club Colorado Sprgs where a gunman last month killed five people a mass shootg; Club Q shootg survivors Jam Slgh and Michael Anrson; and a number of platiffs om s that culmated the landmark civil rights se Obergefell vs.

ImageLorie Smh said her Christian fah requir her to turn away ctomers seekg servic to celebrate same-sex unns.Cred...Rachel Woolf for The New York TimThe Supreme Court sid on Friday wh a web signer Colorado who said she had a First Amendment right to refe to sign weddg webs for same-sex upl spe a state law that forbids discrimatn agast gay people.Jtice Neil M.

“Those servic are no ls protected speech today bee they are nveyed wh a ‘voice that ronat farther than uld om any soapbox.’”The se, though amed as a clash between ee speech and gay rights, was the latt a seri of cisns favor of relig people and groups, notably nservative Christians.The cisn also appeared to suggt that the rights of L.G.B.T.Q. The liberal jtic viewed as somethg else entirely — a dispute that threatened societal protectns for gay rights and rolled back some recent progrs.In an impassned dissent, Jtice Sonia Sotomayor warned that the oute signaled a return to a time when people of lor and other mory groups faced open discrimatn.

SHOULD GAY MARRIAGE BE LEGAL?

“More broadly, today’s cisn weakens longstandg laws that protect all Amerins agast discrimatn public acmodatns — cludg people of lor, people wh disabili, people of fah, and women.”A Colorado law forbids discrimatn agast gay people by bs open to the public as well as statements announcg such discrimatn. “Lbian, gay, bisexual, and transgenr (L.G.B.T.) people, no ls than anyone else, serve that digny and eedom.”Jtice Gorsuch rpond directly to the dissent the majory opn, wrg that the two sis looked at the same se and saw totally different issu.“It is difficult to read the dissent and nclu we are lookg at the same se,” he wrote. The dissentg jtic, he wrote, foced on “the stris gay Amerins have ma towards securg equal jtice unr law.”But the nservative jtic did not see the se through that lens, he said, wrg that “none of this answers the qutn we face today: Can a state force someone who provis her own exprsive servic to abandon her nscience and speak s preferred msage stead?”When the Supreme Court agreed to hear the se, 303 Creative L.L.C.

GOP LAWMAKER ATTEND GAY SON'S WEDDG 3 DAYS AFTER VOTG AGAST SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

Kavangh and Amy Coney Barrett, shifted the urt to the right.Lower urts have generally sid wh gay and lbian upl who were refed service by bakeri, florists and others, lg that potential ctomers are entled to equal treatment, at least parts of the untry wh laws forbiddg discrimatn based on sexual orientatn.The owners of bs challengg those laws have argued that the ernment should not force them to choose between the requirements of their fahs and their livelihoods.