New Paltz mayor charged over gay weddings

[amezri]

Today's WTF? News. Meant to find the Daily News article of this, but it seems the BBC is covering it as well. How embarassing.

Mayor charged over gay weddings

New Paltz Mayor Jason West faces 19 counts of solemnising marriages without a licence.

But he has vowed to go ahead with plans to marry a further 24 gay couples this weekend.

And a second New York mayor John Shields says he will start marrying gay couples - and wants a licence himself to marry his same-sex partner.

[snip]

Ulster County District Attorney Donald Williams, who charged Mr West, said he could face a fine of up to $500 or up to one year in jail - but that he would not press for a prison sentence.

[edit: see also today's New York Daily News: Spitzer: Gay marriage illegal in N.Y.

Spitzer said local clerks in New York should not issue marriage licenses to gay couples and officials like West should not "solemnize same-sex wedding ceremonies."

Spitzer said New York's law contains references to "bride and groom" and "husband and wife" and does not authorize same-sex marriage.

[snip]

Before Spitzer's opinion, Republican Gov. Pataki repeated his assertion that gay marriage is illegal.

/edit]

Look... I understand that gay marriages are an affront to a lot of people's religion, but this country is supposed to stand for religious freedoms, right? Sure, a lot of Christians live here, but a lot of gay people live here, too. I'm saying Christian because our President is one and he's leading the charge. His job is not to spread his religious belief that "gays are evil," his job is to provide for the people of this coutry. It's not like homosexuals are running around eating babies - they just want the same legal status that a "marriage" provides. And if you say marriage is a "holy union", then it isn't fair that anyone else - regardless of religion - is "married." Maybe everyone should just be "civil unioned" or something. I mean, if you go by the Bible, I'm an unclean heathen who's bound for hell, therefore shouldn't be allowed the priviledge of "holy matrimony," right? Feh.

Oh, hey, I know, next he should say that if you believe in Allah, Buddah, or any other non-Judeo-Christian organized religion your marriages are invalid and evil and an affront to God. G'on. I dare ya. Stupid Bush. Keep your religious agendas to yourself, you wanker!

Feh.

Comments

[superswank.livejournal.com]

New Paltz Mayor Jason West faces 19 counts of solemnising marriages without a licence.

Where does it say there that he was charged for solemnising gay marriages? Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that the charges against him are because he didn't have a license to perform the marriages, not because the couples happened to be gay.

Oh, hey, I know, next he should say that if you believe in Allah, Buddah, or any other non-Judeo-Christian organized religion your marriages are invalid and evil and an affront to God.

Are you likening being gay to holding a religious belief? Because the way I understood it, people are born gay, they don't choose it. Whereas most people are free to decide at whatever stage in their life what religion they'd like to practice. A little like comparing apples to oranges, IMHO.

[buhfly.livejournal.com]

Are you likening being gay to holding a religious belief? Because the way I understood it, people are born gay, they don't choose it. Whereas most people are free to decide at whatever stage in their life what religion they'd like to practice. A little like comparing apples to oranges, IMHO.

Uhm...I thought she was pointing out the stupidity of basing your opinions on whether gays should marry or not on what one or two religions say. Like Bush is. His religion = not everyone's religion. Therefore basing something on it is pointless...or at the very least unfair.

[amezri.livejournal.com]

Uh. Like I said. You are more concise than I ^_^

[buhfly.livejournal.com]

*giggle*

[superswank.livejournal.com]

Thank you for clarifying that for me. It is quite possible I mistook her meaning for something else entirely. Forgive me.

sorry, this got really long

[amezri.livejournal.com]

Where does it say there that he was charged for solemnising gay marriages?

You're not wrong. This article from the BBC did not say it, however ALL of the papers that I put on the newstand this morning did. (ie: the Daily News: Spitzer said local clerks in New York should not issue marriage licenses to gay couples and officials like West "should not solemnize same-sex wedding ceremonies.")

I've edited my post to reflect this information. I apologize.

Are you likening being gay to holding a religious belief?

No, I'm not. Not exactly. And maybe I'm saying it wrong, but I do believe that the path we are on is not a good one and could lead to something very bad. George W. Bush is not saying, "well, right now our laws don't allow gay marriage," he's saying that it's wrong and he's going to stop it. Our laws don't specify either way so why is it wrong? And why do we need to make a Constitutional Amendment to stop it?

To him it is gay marriage is wrong and he's waving the Bible around and using that as the backup evidence that gay marriages are wrong (maybe not literally, but it's there) - because marriage is a holy Union between a man and a woman. And that is fine, really, in the privacy of your own home and in your own community and if you are not running a country (unless it's a dictatorship). But this is a country with diverse religious beliefs and diverse people. You cannot base the policies that govern a diverse people on your opinion and your religion.

the way I understood it, people are born gay, they don't choose it.

And as such, it's only logical that they should be allowed equal rights under the law. If you cannot choose to be gay, you cannot choose that you love and want to marry someone of the same gender.

While you and I understand that people are born gay, there are still people who think homosexuality is a disease or a mental condition.

Bush & like-minded are making this country very uncomfortable for people who do not believe the same way they do - and I mean about religion and other things.

I see the things he's doing, the laws he's allowing to be passed, the things he says and it scares me. I joke about seeking religious asylum if he gets reelected, but I would seriously consider it. It's true that everyone is free to decide what religion they want to follow, and that's how it should be. Everyone should be free to believe what they want so long as no one gets hurt.

Except in this country, I'm starting to feel as though one religious group is taking over and heavily encouraging people to conform.

Maybe I'm just paranoid.

Back to the point. The comment I made was an example of how he might use his religious beliefs to persecute other groups of people. Right now they're implying that homosexuality is wrong and saying that gay marriages are "invalid." What next? Free the Middle East because they haven't been saved by God? Buddhists don't believe in any specific god - we have a lot of deities. According to the Bible, that's wrong. I think you can see where my comparison was going.

Also, hey, you might not think like that and you might be more open and understanding about everything. But you are not running the country. Which is really too bad, because we need kind, understanding, open-minded people in those seats.

Sorry about the ramble. I have a lot of pent up issues. Obviously...

Re: sorry, this got really long

[superswank.livejournal.com]

But this is a country with diverse religious beliefs and diverse people. You cannot base the policies that govern a diverse people on your opinion and your religion.

Absolutely. I agree with that 100%.

The comment I made was an example of how he might use his religious beliefs to persecute other groups of people.

I understand that, now, and forgive me for seeking clarification with my earlier comment.
In regards to this, however, I believe that Bush has "handlers" who will stop him before he's allowed to go that far. And I have to believe that (whether it's true or not) so I can sleep soundly at night.

Re: sorry, this got really long

[amezri.livejournal.com]

Never be sorry for asking for clarification :)

And I hope you're right about Bush's babysitters "handlers."

[xpashax.livejournal.com]

I agree, the word marriage should be removed from the legal language, as what the government licenses is not marriage, it is only called marriage.

But that won't happen, this is an issue that makes it too easy to grab votes with.