Same-Sex Marriage Amendment NY State

[Vi-Jay 218]

Passed 33-29.

New York Equality: 1

Obama Bigotry: 0

Fixxored.

[sly_wolf 199]

Good news for divorce lawyers too

[Zero Sum 305]

Good news for divorce lawyers too

At least in NY and like 5 other states at this point. Divorce court TV shows could earn a few TV producers quite a lot.

[juliava 80]

Wake up, people on VJ. Let's say Mr.X who is a US citizen living in NY wants to bring over Mr.Y - a non US citizen who lives overseas. They want to get married in the almighty Empire State so Mr. Y needs a fiancee visa. Can he get it?We all know the answer.

[Zero Sum 305]

Wake up, people on VJ. Let's say Mr.X who is a US citizen living in NY wants to bring over Mr.Y - a non US citizen who lives overseas. They want to get married in the almighty Empire State so Mr. Y needs a fiancee visa. Can he get it?We all know the answer.

When USCIS changes its policies, perhaps.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Fixxored.

Edited June 25, 2011 by Mr. Big Dog

[Vi-Jay 218]

That was very thoughtful of you. Thanks!

[dalegg 143]

Other than now being officially allowed to call themselves married, are there any new benefits they get? At the state level in California for example I've had a hard time distinguishing the rights and benefits of gay domestic partners or civil unions from those of married couples. At the federal level there seems to be some differences, but I don't believe this Ammendment changes that.

[Ban Hammer 12,837]

Other than now being officially allowed to call themselves married, are there any new benefits they get? At the state level in California for example I've had a hard time distinguishing the rights and benefits of gay domestic partners or civil unions from those of married couples. At the federal level there seems to be some differences, but I don't believe this Ammendment changes that.

they should have the same right to be miserable like everyone else who's married.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Other than now being officially allowed to call themselves married, are there any new benefits they get? At the state level in California for example I've had a hard time distinguishing the rights and benefits of gay domestic partners or civil unions from those of married couples. At the federal level there seems to be some differences, but I don't believe this Ammendment changes that.

Yes, they can now make out in public in front of impressionable, young children without getting beaten up. And if any shocked parents protest, the gay couple will tell them, "** off, we're married!"

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Wake up, people on VJ. Let's say Mr.X who is a US citizen living in NY wants to bring over Mr.Y - a non US citizen who lives overseas. They want to get married in the almighty Empire State so Mr. Y needs a fiancee visa. Can he get it?We all know the answer.

No. Because the Feds need to get in your business and do not extend those benefits to Gay couples. The NY ruling is state law, not federal

The feds are not so easily extracted from your personal business

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Other than now being officially allowed to call themselves married, are there any new benefits they get? At the state level in California for example I've had a hard time distinguishing the rights and benefits of gay domestic partners or civil unions from those of married couples. At the federal level there seems to be some differences, but I don't believe this Ammendment changes that.

Yes. They can insure each other's lives as they now have an "insurable interest". They can be beneficiaries of health insurance, etc. They can make life or death decisions about their spouse in medical emergencies, as some examples. Whether that is better than civil union partners or not would depend on the state. In Vermont which has both civil union and Gay marriage there is no real difference.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

When USCIS changes its policies, perhaps.

USCIS will have nothing to do with it. They cannot extend the benefits of visas to Gay couples because the Federal government does not recognize marriage between anyone but one man and one woman. The DOMA prevents it. Oddly enough, Gay couples could, in theory, qualify for the K-1 but not for the AOS which would follow.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

USCIS will have nothing to do with it. They cannot extend the benefits of visas to Gay couples because the Federal government does not recognize marriage between anyone but one man and one woman. The DOMA prevents it. Oddly enough, Gay couples could, in theory, qualify for the K-1 but not for the AOS which would follow.

DOMA is on it's way to the garbage pile of history.

[dalegg 143]

Yes. They can insure each other's lives as they now have an "insurable interest". They can be beneficiaries of health insurance, etc. They can make life or death decisions about their spouse in medical emergencies, as some examples. Whether that is better than civil union partners or not would depend on the state. In Vermont which has both civil union and Gay marriage there is no real difference.

That doesn't sound any different from what civil unions have in California.

wait, wait, wait. In Vermont, why didn't they disband civil unions when Gay marriage became legal? You mean they have a choice? Do heterosexual couples have the choice of just entering into civil unions too?