Opposition to gay marriage in New York

What government benefits? Recognizing gay marriage shouldn't cost the state anything. Are we the only country that is having this rough a time with this issue?

On a lighter note...... Yaaaaaaay, you have your crown back!!!!!!!

There is a separation between church and state. The Christians ( of which I am one ) do not have the right to tell everyone else how to live in the country, and I like it that way.
Consenting adult sould be allowed to marry period

You'd think people would realize by now that this whole thing about gay marriage (along with "the flag mutilation" thing) has been made an "issue" by those factions who wish to take the American public's attention away from the fact that we're spending FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS A SECOND in Iraq...

There is always an excuse, it hasn't broken the bank in MA,

I can't see how a gay marriage can cost the government any more than a straight marriage. How are they different in cost?

I really don't have any thoughts one way or the other.

ha ha, my crown.

You have to understand this is New York, "They talk very loudly, very fast, and altogether." There are a number of issues that always seem to be strangely tied together. On the recent prayer rally by the Knights of Columbus in Albany, gay marriage had equal billing with pro-life issues. Given that Patterson (the current governor) is still pushing Spitzer's (the previous governor) legislation that would force all Catholic hospitals to not only perform abortions but to provide abortion coverage to all employees of the church one would think that equal billing is an odd thing. There was even talk of some vile conspiracy between the pro-choice groups and the gay-marriage groups ("Our cause is your cause.") This is why circumventing the legislature (Democratic controlled house and Republican controlled senate) is so against New York thinking. No one in the un-holy trinity of Governor, Speaker of the House, and Senate Majority Leader is above the other. This kind of thinking brought down the mighty Spitzer and woe to Patterson if he thinks he is the one and only god of New York.

Thanks, Peter! I had not heard about this.

Washington state employees can have their domestic partners covered with benefits, but we still do not recognize gay marriage.

Well you do have to go over to Kinkos and print new application forms. So there's that.

Yes, the state could save money by not granting government benefits to same-sex couples. And they could save even more money by not granting benefits to left-handed couples, red headed couples, very short couples, anemic couples, couples from Peru, and bald couples.

Yeah !!!

This from the state that's former Governor became former for spending how much on call girls, while obtaining them through a method he had helped push through methods for law enforcement to catch people doing this.

If someone is in a same sex marriage and one works and one does not for what ever reason and the one who does work is a state or government employee and cannot provide coverage to the other one doesn't the other one simply apply for Medicaid? The same Medicaid that a report on NPR said that in many places, especially New York, people on this system could not find a physician who accepts it therefor they are forced to go to the ER for all their care, which is far more expensive and takes away time and resources from other patients who may be in more dire circumstances. So this Reverend decides to hoop and holler because what he is afraid if gays are treated like human beings that a bunch of straight people are going to change teams? I don't think it works that way. Personally I think that any empoyer (government included) who provides coverage to their employees should have to offer the option to extend it to their domestic partners, regardless of if they are the same sex or not.

Thank you for submitting your content to:
The group: We Comment Back

I haven't heard

Thomas: Can't agree with your cynicism. While there may be people who do not like "red hair" (I am one who doesn't fancy it) or are "edgy" around "lefties" (I am not one of them), there is a very large portion of our general population who finds public homosexual demonstrative activities as offensive and counter to the interests of society as a whole. I see no logical relationship between this important issue and those fanciful and contrived issues.

Donald: Methinks you don't see the humor.

Wow! That's humor? I must be a dull boy. Sorry.

Let's all vote on it.