RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

10/13/2009

Arizona group still out to protect New Yorkers from themselves

by Jeremy Hooper

6A00D8341C503453Ef011278D6C21928A4-1The Alliance Defense Fund has already bit it in lower courts. But hell hath no fury like a conservative legal group that wants you to believe that its somehow been scorned. Thus the reason why the Arizona-based crew is back in New York court today, hoping to strip Empire State gay couples (like this writer and his husband) of benefits:

ALBANY, N.Y. – New York's top court is set to hear arguments against providing government benefits to same sex couples married in Canada or other jurisdictions where such marriages are legal.
...
The Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments Tuesday by the Alliance Defense Fund of Scottsdale, Ariz., contending those benefits are unlawful in New York, which does not permit same-sex marriages.

NY top court to consider gay marriage benefits [AP via Yahoo!]

We expect a swift judicial smackdown, just like the one ADF received in lower courts. But then again, New York's highest court did deny same-sex couples of in-state marriage equality on the basis of the uber-conservation, uber-flawed "kid argument." So we're not going to take anything (i.e. our rights and protections that we are currently enjoying without incident) for granted until the gavel bangs, the ADF goes home, and New York clocks prove that they will continue to run forward rather than in reverse.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails