LEARN ABOUT WHAT GAY MARRIAGE IS ALL ABOUT AND SEE HOW DOES

UNITED STATES DEALS WITH GAY MARRIAGE. 

Gay marriage, in the United States, is not a federally-recognized institution. The United States’
government places the regulatory or administrative issues (in terms of permitting those of the
same sex to marry) in the local government’s hands. Although same-sex or gay marriage are not
federally recognized, same-sex couples are permitted to marry in five states and one district—
gay marriage is regarded as legal and is recognized in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Iowa, New
Hampshire, Vermont, and the District of Columbia.) In these specific areas, gay marriages are
viewed as regular unions between heterosexual couples; gay marriages, when affirmed in the
aforementioned states, receive the same rights and state-level benefits as heterosexual couples.
•    Thirty-one states possess constitutional restrictions which limit marriage to one woman and
one man. In 1996, the United States Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act which
defines marriage solely as a union between couples of the opposite sex. This definition
applies to all federal purposes and allowing for the non-recognition amongst the states.
•    Since this time, there have been numerous appeals and Supreme Court rulings to further
elucidate the federal sentiment in regards to gay marriage. As of now, each local court system
has the ability to legally recognize gay marriage or rule that the union is not permitted. 

SOME SYNOPSIS ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE IN NEW YORK

One of the most liberal states and cities in the country, New York, New York, does not take part
in New York gay marriage. New York Marriages may only take place between one man and one
woman. There is a large number of gay people living in New York state that would fight
everyday for the right to be recognized in a New York marriage. As for now, New Yorkers will
have to travel to nearby Massachusetts if they would like to get married and be a New York gay
couple that has been married in another state. In 2008, New York governor David Patterson
issued a directive requiring that the state recognize all same-sex that took place in other states.
New York state does recognize and give state benefits to New York gay couples who got married
elsewhere. Being a state that gives New York gay couples who have been married somewhere
else the same rights as other New York marriages as far as state rights go, makes New York an
attractive place for gay couples to reside.

 The New York Assembly has had no problems passing bills to be passed up to the Senate
regarding gays and their right to have a New York marriage, but the Senate repeatedly rejects
them, most recently in December of 2009. The state has shown that it is ready to move on and
allow same-sex marriage as many straight people feel it is none of their business or they simply
have no problem with two people of the same sex joining together in marriage. The people in
charge however have shown to be stuck in their own ways even though there is no harm that a
same-sex marriage taking place could possibly harm them in their daily lives. Supporters of New
York gay marriage are ready to move have been ready for change for many years and believe it
is about time everyone is treated as equals.

    As a sign of rebellion, New Paltz mayor Jason West married 25 same-sex couples. The gay
New York marriages which were performed all at once were quickly shot down just like the
Senator in New Mexico who married gays couples. Not only were the marriages ruled invalid but
Mayor West was charged with 19 misdemeanors. Those charges were dropped and then
reinstated only to be fought against in court and dropped again for good. It will always be one of
the most outspoken places, especially when it comes to fighting for gay's rights to marry. In time
it is likely that New York will be one of the states that offers same-sex marriages or at least their
own civil unions.

SOME FACTS ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE

In 1972, the Supreme Court of Minnesota in Baker v. Nelson ruled that it did not violate the
federal Constitution for a state to deny a civil marriage license to a same-sex couple. The
controversy over same-sex marriage was revived in 1993, when the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled
that the state constitutional ban on sex discrimination meant that same-sex couples were entitled
to a civil marriage license unless the state could prove a compelling state interest. . A lower court
in Hawaii then found that the state had failed to show such a compelling interest , and same-sex
marriage was legal in Hawaii for a day, before the judge stayed his ruling and the state
constitution was amended in 1998 to allow the legislature to restrict marriage to different-sex
couples.

While the events in Hawaii did not actually lead to marriage rights for same-sex couples, they
helped prompt the United States Congress to enact the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, which
forbade the federal government from recognizing same-sex unions and permitted states to decide
for themselves whether to recognize same-sex unions performed in other jurisdictions; until that
point, there had been a controversy over whether states would be required to extend marriage
rights to couples married in other states. The rights and responsibilities of marriage granted at the
federal level, thus, do not apply to same-sex unions. Several states followed Congress and
enacted similar laws denying recognition of marriage or other forms of union between two
persons of the same sex.
In 1999, the Vermont State Supreme Court ruled in Baker v. Vermont that the state had to offer
the benefits and responsibilities of civil marriage to same-sex couples, and thus the state
legislature enacted a civil unions bill. In 2007, the legislature introduced a bill to legalize same-
sex marriage. The bill passed in 2009 but was vetoed by the governor. However, the legislature
overrode the veto, and the law became effective on September 1, 2009.

In 2004, the Massachusetts Supreme Court, in Goodridge v. Department of Public

Health, legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts.

In 2007 a similar decision in Iowa ruled that restriction of marriage to opposite-sex couples was
discriminatory. The decision was stayed to allow the state to appeal, although not before one
same-sex couple had been issued a marriage license. In 2009, the Iowa Supreme
Court unanimously upheld the lower court's ruling and marriage licenses to same-sex couples
became available on April 24, 2009.

In May 2009, Maine passed a marriage equality law. Same-sex marriage opponents placed a
referendum to repeal the law on the November ballot and were successful in their repeal bid.

In 2010, Washington, D. C. legislatively enacted marriage equality in the district.

These state court opinions prompted calls for a Federal Marriage Amendment, along with state
amendments to ensure that courts would not change the civil definition of marriage. As of 2007,
the legal options available to same-sex couples depend on what state they reside in.

State legislatures
in Colorado (2009), Maine (2004), Connecticut (2005), California (1999), Hawaii (1997), Wisco
nsin (2009), Nevada (2009), New Jersey (2007), Washington (2007), New
Hampshire (2008), Oregon (2008) and Maryland (2008) as well as Illinois(2011), have enacted
either civil unions or more limited domestic partnership options for same-sex couples.

However, a backlash of these efforts was felt during the 2004 election cycle where fourteen
states amended their constitution to ban recognition of same-sex marriages and often civil unions
as well. Mississippi voters amended their constitution, 86% to 14% – the largest margin in any
state[3][4] – to ban same-sex marriage and to prohibit the state from recognizing same-sex
marriages that are legal elsewhere. Laws in Virginia, Michigan, Nebraska and Ohio, the most
far-reaching, forbids recognition of any benefits similar to those of marriage between people of
the same sex.

Recent polls have consistently shown that the nation can be divided into roughly equal thirds:
one third supports gay marriage completely, another supports only civil unions, and the last is
against any form of union entirely . However, in terms of attitudes to homosexuality, the United
States can hardly be called one country. It is common for polls to show a clear majority support
for gay marriage in Northeastern states, and occasionally (but less frequently), Pacific Coast
states. States that have consistently shown a majority support for gay marriage for at least the
past few years include Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York , New
Jersey , New Hampshire, and the capital, as well as (occasionally) Hawaii, Oregon, and
Washington. While the majority of these states do not (currently) have gay marriage, Iowa,
which does have gay marriage, does not have majority support; in fact, polls place support in the
high thirties or low forties (still slightly higher than the national average). In New York,
meanwhile, where there is a pretty clear majority support (consistently reported as at least a four-
point lead since 2005), there is neither marriage nor civil unions. Nonetheless, Iowa falls into a
second category of states, where the incoming voting generation overwhelmingly supports gay
marriage: those under thirty have support placed in the sixties. 

Furthermore, a minority of states don't even support civil unions; however, this is not
reflected in the laws of the majority – a small minority actually have civil unions (and most of
those, in turn, now support an upgrade to total marriage), and a majority of states have
constitutional amendments similar to those of Virginia and Ohio, banning not only marriage but
also unions. Many of these states, especially Wisconsin, actually have a majority, even
sometimes an overwhelming majority (over 65–70 percent), support of civil unions. Even Utah, a
conservative state, has recently been shown to have a slight majority backing of civil unions.

While New England, Pacific Coast and northern Middle Atlantic states may have support for
full-fledged marriage, polls have revealed that states in the deep south still support
homosexuality being completely illegal, and overwhelmingly oppose marriage-like rights or
same-sex marriage. This sharp division of support does not exist among the EU countries and
there is no EU country that is in favor of homosexuality being illegal (though some countries that
aspire to join the EU, such as Ukraine, do). Due to the diversity of opinions within the U.S., it is
generally viewed by LGBT-activists that the best way to speak of the U.S. is state by state.

A single gay person or a same-sex couple can adopt in some states, although there are fewer
states where they may adopt children jointly with their partners

Anti-
Anti- discrimination
Allows gays to
Same-sex sexual Recognition of Same-sex Same-sex discrimination Laws concerning
LGBT rights in: serve openly in
activity same-sex unions marriage adoption Laws (sexual gender
military?
orientation) identity/expressio
n

 An Act of
Congress
providing a  /   No
mechanism to federal  /   No
 Legal repeal Don't ask, protections. federal protections.
 /   Single
nationwide since  /   Varies  /   Varies don't tell was Banned in 20 Banned in 13
gay persons may
 United States 2003. by state, but not by state, but not signed into law by states. Included in states. Included in
adopt, laws on
+ UN decl. sign. recognized by recognized by PresidentObama o the federal hate the federal hate
couples vary by
See Lawrence v. federal gov't. federal gov't n 22 December crimes law since crimes law since
state
Texas 2010. As of 2009. 2009. See Matthew
February 2011, the See Matthew Shepard Act
Pentagon is Shepard Act
starting to
dismantle DADT.