Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Friday, September 29, 2006

Judge Says Gay Rhode Island Couple Can Marry In Mass.

Hmm…

BOSTON - A gay couple from Rhode Island has the right to marry in Massachusetts because laws in their home state do not expressly prohibit same-sex marriage, a judge ruled Friday.

Wendy Becker and Mary Norton of Providence argued that a 1913 law that forbids out-of-state residents from marrying in Massachusetts if their marriage would not be permitted in their home state did not apply to them because Rhode Island does not specifically ban gay marriage.

Superior Court Judge Thomas Connolly agreed.

“No evidence was introduced before this court of a constitutional amendment, statute, or controlling appellate decision from Rhode Island that explicitly deems void or otherwise expressly forbids same-sex marriage,” he ruled.

Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, which represented the couples, hailed the decision “as another step toward marriage equality.” Becker and Norton said they were “thrilled.”

The bolded section is interesting.  Seems to me that if there is nothing in Rhode Island law that “expressly forbids same-sex marriage” then why couldn’t this couple get married in Rhode Island instead of Mass.?

Comments

Avatar for aNONOMISLY

talking about gays and poletics:

here something from someone I regarded as a rather good Congressman until now.

The story

Why I regarded him as a rather good Congressman:

Foley was one of the foremost critics in the House of child pornography. Foley was chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. He introduced a bill in 2002 to outlaw websites featuring sexually suggestive images of preteen children, saying that “these websites are nothing more than a fix for pedophiles."[7] In June 2003 he wrote letters to the governor and attorney general of Florida, asking them to review the legality of a program for teenagers of a Lake Como nudist resort in Land O’Lakes, Florida.[8]

Foley’s legislation to change federal sex offender laws was supported by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, America’s Most Wanted host John Walsh, and a number of victims’ rights groups. President George W. Bush signed it into law as part of the Adam Walsh Child Safety and Protection Act of 2006.

Foley also succeeded in getting a law passed that allows volunteer youth-serving organizations like the Boy Scouts of America and Boys and Girls Clubs to have access to FBI fingerprint background checks to help protect children.[/quote]

some Irony:

Federal authorities say such messages could result in Foley’s prosecution, under some of the same laws he helped to enact.
aNONOMISLY on September 29, 2006 at 03:25 pm
Avatar for Steve

I posted on that story as well.

The guy obviously has some issues he needs to deal with regarding teenage boys.

Steve on September 29, 2006 at 03:36 pm
Avatar for aNONOMISLY

for some reason the link to the description of his great work would not work. ..here it is once again

aNONOMISLY on September 29, 2006 at 03:43 pm
Avatar for aNONOMISLY

Ann Coulter lives within that district (Palm Spring, Florida) --lets draft her to run!

aNONOMISLY on September 29, 2006 at 03:45 pm

No matter what they call it, what gays do will never be marriage.  It’s the only purely recreational sex.


If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

robert108 on September 29, 2006 at 06:00 pm

Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, which represented the couples, hailed the decision “as another step toward marriage equality.”

I’m tired of seeing that. There is marriage equality now. The rules are the same for everybody.

likwidshoe on September 29, 2006 at 06:35 pm

When lefties use the term “equality”, they always mean “superiority”, just like the feminists.


If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

robert108 on September 29, 2006 at 06:46 pm
Avatar for aNONOMISLY

Seems to me that if there is nothing in Rhode Island law that “expressly forbids same-sex marriage” then why couldn’t this couple get married in Rhode Island instead of Mass.?

this is a great question. How did the judge reason his way out of it?

aNONOMISLY on September 30, 2006 at 07:38 am
Avatar for aNONOMISLY

..I don’t see how he could.

aNONOMISLY on September 30, 2006 at 07:39 am
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.