Test 2

Please select your preferred language.

請選擇你慣用的語言。

请选择你惯用的语言。

English
中文简体
台灣繁體
香港繁體

登入

记住我

初到 Fridae?

Fridae Mobile

Advertisement
Highlights

More About Us

新闻&特写

« 较新的 | 较旧的 »
8 Apr 2009

Vermont legalises same-sex marriage

The Legislature overrode Gov. Jim Douglas's veto making Vermont the fourth state in the US to allow same-sex couples to marry, and the first to do so without a court order - by just by one vote.

Coming nine years after Vermont adopted its first-in-the-nation civil unions law in 2000, Vermont has become the fourth state in the US to legalise gay marriage - and the first to do so with a legislature's vote.

Tuesday morning's legislative action came less than a day after Governor Jim Douglas issued a veto message saying the bill would not improve the lot of gay and lesbian couples because it still would not provide them rights under federal and other states' laws.

The House's 100-to-49 vote was taken about an hour after the state Senate voted 23-5 to override Monday's veto by the Republican governor. The new law takes effect on Sept. 1.

Under Vermont law, two-thirds of each chamber had to vote for override.

It is now the fourth state to permit same-sex marriage. Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa are the others. Their approvals of gay marriage came from the courts.

Read more:

Vermont, and Gay Marriage (Seattle Times): The action by Vermont's legislature to legalize gay marriage over the governor's veto is hugely significant. For the first time, it's not a state supreme court doing it, but the people's representatives--and in this case, two-thirds of them.

Vermont is only a small piece of America--the most liberal state, according to a friend of mine who lives there. Vermont is the least religious state, according to a new survey. Vermont, with Maine, has the lowest birth rate of any state. And Vermont's vote for Obama was 68 percent, the highest of any state except Hawaii (72 percent).

Gay marriage wins by 1 vote (burlingtonfreepress.com): House Speaker Shap Smith's voice choked with emotion as he read the vote count from the podium: 100-49.

By the narrowest of margins, the Legislature overrode Gov. Jim Douglas' veto Tuesday and Vermont became the fourth state in the nation to allow same-sex couples to marry, and the first to do so without a court order.

"It really is a historic moment," Smith said afterward.

Vermont legalizes same-sex marriage (boston.com): That it would be a tight vote was never in doubt, but the outcome was unclear until the roll call came to the end and Jeff Young, a gardener and freshman Democrat, switched his vote with a simple "yes" from his wooden desk in the chandelier-lit chamber.

His change of mind tipped the balance yesterday in the state House of Representatives, making Vermont the fourth state in the country to legalize marriage between same-sex couples - and the first by a legislative vote.

United States

读者回应

1. 2009-04-08 18:45  
Bravo Vermont!!! Hugs & Kisses!!!

Keep the momentum going city states and soon the world will be ONE again!

Congrats!!!
2. 2009-04-08 18:57  
So nice to see such a big majority. My geography is rubbish though, I thought Vermont was on the other side of the country. Thanks for the map!
3. 2009-04-08 19:46  
MORE happy happy divorce lawyers to set up offices and handle gay men divorce cases...bitchy ones. Screaming " U slut!" "Oh yeh....u did my best fren on my bed when I was at work...I will take the pat etc etc".....Gay marriage base on sex....sure end up in bitter divorce...making lawyers RICH RICH RICH...I wish I am a lawyer too.
4. 2009-04-08 20:47  
Quoting the late, great Freddie Mercury:

Another One Bites The Dust!
5. 2009-04-08 21:35  
great.....!!!!
Jakarta SOON!!!
6. 2009-04-09 08:41  
BrownHard, you really should stop being so bitter. Or just take it elsewhere...

7. 2009-04-09 08:50  
post #3 - HAHAHAHAHA HILARIOUS!!!! =D

ok here's the thing. can somebody please enlighten me.

The call for gay marriage was pressed because some gay couple could not inherit their partner's so called "CPF" money and assets to care for their loved ones in case they passed on cos they are not legally "married", right? But by having civil unions and domestic partnerships, isn't that cause and purpose fulfilled? So why the press for marriage? Isn't it a blatant "give an inch, want a yard" behavior?

Is it because so that us queens can have a flamboyant ala wedding of the year? Or...? Hmm... I seriously dont see the point in a "marriage" when
have a whole lavish ceremony of saying "I do" when most of the Americans/world population are Atheist/agnostic/free thinker/don't go to church anyway? Isn't it ironic and hypocritical that some deny/can't make up their mind about God's existence, not going to church since they said Churches and bible discriminates homosexuality, then why bother to get married in front of a pastor in a church?

Even the Queen Mama, Sir Elton John was telling the American gays not to use the word marriage, based on the previous (I think last year's) fridae news feature.

I'm not trying to offend anyone or be rude about it, but maybe perhaps someone could just maybe tell me more about it. Cheers! =D
8. 2009-04-09 09:47  
With all due respect,

Those who think they're straight and member of Fridae, please go to other appropriate forums instead of giving offensive comments here. You're in the wrong website here.

For girls, there are many straight guys waiting for you, and for guys, there are many straight girls also waiting for you, no need to make fun or insult us because of our sex orientation and preference.

Yes, there are many cheating unfaithful GAYS who think and care only about SEX anywhere, anytime with anyone, but

There are also ones who genuinely love their partners and deserve equal rights and protection under the LAWS for marriage couple and to establish loving families.

Kudos for Vermont, time for the entire humanity to get some enlightenment and to get rid of hatred and prejudice on each other because of our differences.

9. 2009-04-09 09:51  
just my 2 cents here,

Maybe it's time for all PLU worldwide to show some

self respect and prude in all Gay Parades worldwide, to show

to public that we're just normal people with MORAL and ETHICS

not sicko exhibitionists who love to show our sexy and tiny underwears and making out

to the public wildly.

I am actually sick of Gay Parades who show nothing but lust and hedonism. It's time to show the world that we deserve equal rights and we deserve some respect as well by cleaning up our acts.
10. 2009-04-09 10:34  
post # 9 - I agree. There ARE civilised gay with moral and ethics, but some chose to be flamboyant, bitchy and all out in colourful bdsm and tiny thongs and stuff. I mean, come on, how do you expect the world to take us seriously if we ourselves potray to the world as such?

note: it is a well known known fact that its hard to find a truly monogamous gay couple, i think its ok to luahg at ourselves once in a while like post #3 instead of being so bitter and defensive all the time.

I'm still hoping for someone to tell me more about this gay marriage thingy :(
11. 2009-04-09 11:08  
Foxy_Tara and ry668899, I agree with your good points. For why marriage, this is the reason why;

http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/unionvmarriage.htm

As for kampong tart losers like Post #3 Brown Hard and her twin sister gymhotbod, they will end up lonely and bitter with all their second hand makeup and ugly sayongs. Dun worry about them, they need constant attention to feel alive cos they are already brain dead. Jokes on you loser! zzzz
回应#12於被作者删除。
13. 2009-04-09 12:59  
foxy_tara: IF it is a "well known fact" that "it's truly hard to find a monogamous GAY couple", have you ever asked yourself the simple question, "why"? And, have you ever considered as plausible that it's also truly hard to find a monogamous HETEROSEXUAL couple? In addition, how would you go about PROVING monogamy in order to validate this allegedly "well-known fact"?? What scientific, sociological studies have attempted to do so? Please refer us to your research. And, were you to study national divorce rates around the world among MARRIED HETERO couples, you might also be enlightened to learn that HETERO MARRIAGES are also not always such a stable, blissful institution. Perhaps HETEROS have had more practice at lying, more practice denying and hiding their indiscretions and affairs, while the HOMOS spend less energy in denial and fabricating lies? When for centuries HOMOS have been oppressed, tortured, murdered, marginalized by the very governments that are supposed to serve and protect them, is it such a stretch of an imagination or leap of logic to see that, of course, our attempts to establish and maintain meaningful, long-term, (monogamous even) relationships have for centuries been met from every direction with opposition, contempt, and hate?
14. 2009-04-09 13:19  
The core assumption is that our world will be a better place if we're all treated equally and fairly by our governments, society, the media, our families, and our friends. If this has to first happen "under legislation of the law", at least that is an important first step. Society will eventually bend, flex and change to a point that being GAY, HOMO, TRANSGENDERED, HETERO, ASSEXUAL, will become NORMAL and ACCEPTABLE...it will become a NON-issue. Another assumption is that we humans, regardless of our sexual orientation, desires or lifestyles all deserve equal choices. The choice to marry, OR NOT. The choice to raise children, OR NOT. The choice to pass our estates on to our partners and children, OR NOT. The choice to be flamoyant, OR NOT. We live in a HETERO-dominated world. Even the HETEROS cheat on their partners and in their marriages; even the HETEROS kill, steal, lie and have sex in public places; and they also act out flamboyantly.
15. 2009-04-09 13:40  
caesar2003 , I like what you posted. Good point indeed.

OK so granted that all couples cheat, be it homo or hetero. My MAIN point being, theres this thing about civil unions and domestic partnerships that offers EQUAL rights (custody child parenting next of kin asset etc), Why Marriage?

See, from what I know - and I may be wrong aboutt his but - Elton went to city hall with a lavish flair and signed the papers and have this huge party back at his house and invited megastars. (forgive me if im wrong on this one)

No wedding.

OZ also have the same thing about civil unionship. My friend is now an OZ citizen cos he had a civil union with his bf. And they even adopt a little boy. Everything legal.

Still no wedding.

SO whats the big Hoo Haa about? If not perhaps the fantasy of having a lavish "I Do" gala in front of the very pastor you detest?
16. 2009-04-09 20:00  
Sorry for any repetition, but just to recap some answers on similar questions from earlier articles:

Divorce:
Figures published in 2008 in the UK showed that the divorce rate for gays in the UK was less than 1% since introduction of CPs in December 2005.

Out of the 24,629 gay couples that had married since the law came into operation in December 2005, 245 divorce petitions had been filed by August 2008; out of that number, 108 petitions had led to the dissolution of the relationship. So about 99.5 % were still married. While I know it's not possible to compare like with like for statistical purposes, it's worth noting that the general heterosexual divorce rate these days is around 50%. There's therefore no evidence that those gays that want to get married are more likely to divorce than straight couples.

On the term "marriage":
if it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, it's a duck:

In England marriage is historically a form of contract, (not a legal Church service until the 18th century): in the UK, CP is a civil contract indistinguishable from the civil marriage contract between the opposite sexes. Though the term marriage is not formally used, it is used informally by almost everyone. CP in the UK IS a form of marriage. Eventually I expect the two systems will merge, as it is a pointless duplication that probably only exists because of the prejudices of a number of old fogies and bishops in the House of Lords (we still have over 26 Bishops and other religious figures in our Upper House, though only about 7% of the population actually attend church).

Post #14 Foxy_Tara says "that offers EQUAL rights (custody child parenting next of kin asset etc), Why [push for] Marriage?"

Though personally I'm happy with what we have in the UK, the real answer to this question is "why not". The burden of proof is on those who want to prohibit something. As the Judge said in Iowa, there is no government purpose served by denying the right to marry to gays. However, I'm not aware of any demand for more than we have already within the UK though we're aware that the only reason we have a parallel system is because of prejudice in some quarters. There is though a possible point that international recognition beyond the EU may be easier in the long run for countries that go for simply extending existing marriage laws to gay couples.

As we've heard from posters on this website, the situation is complex in the States; there is not even national recognition for gay couples whatever their position in their own State. There are various different levels of partnership, or none at all, depending where you live. In America, there is also a history of various different types of marriage, even "communal" marriages. Marriage laws seem to have been a continual battleground there: it's not very long ago that bans on inter-racial marriages were overturned.

There is also a history in the US of not compromising when it comes to equality for all before the law. So even if it's just the word, "marriage", and all else were equal, they will still fight for it as a symbol of complete equality, and against the apartheid of "separate but equal".

17. 2009-04-09 20:57  
Steveuk: thank you for the insight!

Maybe, I equate marriages like in Singapore, where you'll have to go to Registry of MArriages and sign some paper signifying your unionship and with that paper you are legally bound as a couple and after signing that paper, you can choose to have tea ceremony and 10 course dinnerfor the chinese, or a joyous malay wedding under the void deck, or fire walking ceremony for the indians, its all CULTURALLY, TRADITIONALLY AND RELIGIOUSLY INFLUENCED, which we can do without.

Bottom line,in SG we still have to sign that paper in order to get "married". SO to me, it doesnt really make a diffrence whether homos or hetero, marriage or non marriage. it still a union nontheless.

So ,personally, again I dont see the point nor need to get "married", CP is fine with me.

On the term "marriage":
if it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, it's a duck:
18. 2009-04-09 20:57  
bravo bravo bravo caesar2003 and steveuk... it is indeed all about equality and rights (and a good dose of unapologetic dignity)... personally i don't give a rat's ass if it's called marriage or civil partnerships or whatever as long as my rights as a citizen and as a human being are recognized and protected... fortunately i live in France, a country where sexuality hardly raises an eyebrow... we had a presidential election last year when one of the candidates was an unmarried woman with 4 kids from long-term affair with her boyfriend and the other candidate (who won the election) had a mistress and his wife had a lover whom she later married (she wore Versace! very unpatriotic).... the current minister of justice (an unmarried woman) just had a baby and refuses to name the father (but she wears Dior so all is forgiven).... 40% of kids are born to unmarried couples.... and last year there were more registrations of civil partnerships (both gay and straight) than traditional marriages.... so it's kinda ironic that in Europe straights are going the gay way while in the USA gays wanna go the straight way :)

unfortunately, in the usa, it is indeed a brutal war between two very rigid sides... the battlefield is marriage... whether u want it or not for yourself, every self-respecting gay has gotta join the fight (and wound as many nutso Christian fundies as we can)... except in a few progressive states like vermont and massachusetts we can't really expect any help from public opinion... and without public opinion behind us, we can't expect the legislative and executive branches of government to stray from unreasonable and unfair traditions to recognize or protect our rights.... mercifully the judiciary, entrusted with the obligation of ensuring that there is constitutionally guaranteed "equal protection under the law", can and does understand the tension between tradition and rights... it was, after all, the courts that began to dismantle racial inequalities 50 years ago when public opinion (except in a cluster of progressive states) was unready to accept it... it seems that in the usa tolerance and acceptance are often achieved after--not before-- rights and equality are legally recognized and protected... thank god for the separation of powers, eh?
回应#19於被作者删除。
回应#20於被作者删除。
回应#21於被作者删除。
回应#22於被作者删除。
回应#23於被作者删除。
回应#24於被作者删除。
回应#25於被作者删除。
回应#26於被作者删除。
回应#27於被作者删除。
28. 2009-04-10 13:52  
Post #11 jammyboi says "for kampong tart losers like Post #3 Brown Hard and her twin sister gymhotbod, they will end up lonely and bitter with all their second hand makeup and ugly sayongs. Dun worry about them, they need constant attention to feel alive cos they are already brain dead. Jokes on you loser! zzzz "

AH Q , the Queen Of Temple Street has spoken again. He thought that he is brainy but in reality, he only quacks like a "cheap temple street duck" and only recites what others have to say. Hmmmm from the way he writes, his brain seems inside his arse and uses his own tart as makeups.

What a lousy loser !! Can't you have anything original other "Oh so and so bravo" ... "so and so brillant" ?? Yuck !! And What a stench when you open your mouth !! Stop using your other orific to speak girl !!

I pity the Poor guy who kept this cheap street trash from temple street.

jammyboi, have you found out who Ah Q is like in the novel by LuShun ? Oh forgot, of course, you wouldn't understand as your brain is located inside your arse.
29. 2009-04-10 20:00  
Jammy, Gymmy, nice to see you guys back together. You would make a great couple ;)

Post 16 Foxy Tiara "Bottom line,in SG we still have to sign that paper in order to get "married". SO to me, it doesnt really make a diffrence whether homos or hetero, marriage or non marriage. it still a union nontheless. "

Sure, if everyone just has to sign the register as the legal bit, they can have whatever ceremony or celebration they want, or none, after that, if that's your system. Perfect.

Our system for civil straight marriages and CPs includes the option of a ceremony as part of the whole thing at the Registry Office. My feeling is that as it's the biggest decision and commitment, and happiest day, of most peoples' lives, why not celebrate it, but that's a personal choice.

Pherry (post 17); thanks for that info on French public life; hilarious, it would most likely be seen as scandal in the UK. I wish the British press could have such a laid back attitude to our politicians' sex lives :)

30. 2009-04-10 20:53  
My my, steveuk, please, u can have gymmy all to yourself. I insist. Moreover, he fancies u way much more, publicly professing his adulation for your great wisdom as a retired lawyer. Also, logistically, he's much nearer. Dun be shy la, this one's on me. Have fun together ya? Yikes..:P
31. 2009-04-10 21:17  
poor pathetic jammuboi (faceless coward)
1....u want gay marriage so much, worship the idea n vision of gay marriage as the epitome of behing equal. HATE the country where u r for not allowing such act....u save yr $$$ n go to Vermoont Iowa Sweden...n get married to yr ugly BF....only to come back n that peice of marriage license is NOT recognised.
2....U curse and swear at the government of the country u r in for NOT being like Sweden and whatever few places that recognise gay marriage...but cannot do anything but swear and curse at them...while u dream of how wonderful it wld b if the goverment in yr country legalise it.
3....if u form a party to rally n riot outside the parliament of yr country....demanding gay rights gay marriage...many of yr gay supporters wld BACK OUT on that day as they treasure their jobs MORE. Then u will hear them say...they r actually comfortable with what it's like at home. In Spore cost of living is high, gay lovers meet as much as possible if they cannot a home together...when they no longer like each other, a quick break up....in Malaysia some gay lovers live together ...no fuss abt marriage n legality...they might then say they r comfy with how things re than to rally n fight n march for gay rights gay marriage....
end up only u n a very few idiots like yrself wld be there that day holding banners to march to the parliament...how many say 6 of u??? hahahahaahahaha even the media wld not waste their time on morons like a jammyboi cos he is ugly.
32. 2009-04-10 22:18  
Come on Jammy, it's obvious you and Gymmy have some chemistry going here ;)
33. 2009-04-11 02:55  
Haha, clearly, expected reactions from low life hypocritical losers like BrownHard & gymwhorebod, who's only mission in life is shameless hardcore self glorification, slandering others and leeching off the victories of gay movements around the world. Larry Craig would love to have you expired kampong tarts for breakfast whilst pooping in his next toilet visit.

But dun flush out too far off the sewage pipes though, you aunties may end up as recycled sanitary pads for the newly elected fundamental anti gay "christian" b.i.t.c.h.e.s at AWARE.
Aw, you know you both want it. Dun fight it, nor shed any blood over this ya? Just be good little sani pads and let them color you both blind with rainbow glory.

Yawn..zzz,..have fun ladies! :D
34. 2009-04-11 17:01  
Ok ok steveuk if you persist. What ever gets your old boner working. Have fun ya?..;)
回应#35於被作者删除。
36. 2009-04-11 21:19  
Post #24 jammyboi says (Posted : 11 April 2009 17:01) :
"Ok ok steveuk if you persist. What ever gets your old boner working. Have fun ya?..;) "

Sorry, fantasising about you two wouldn't work. You're both so anonymous anyway, even Gymmy has said his ID was his bf's and he's not really a gymhotbod.

The lighthearted banter is funny from time to time, but when it goes too far or happens too often, it's not very constructive, and the brownshirts just rub their hands with glee.

You both make some good points, but sometimes they get lost in the crossfire.

回应#37於被作者删除。
回应#38於被作者删除。
回应#39於被作者删除。
回应#40於被作者删除。
41. 2009-04-12 09:47  
Seriously jammyboi, have you at the very least, make an effort to find out about LuShun's "The story of AH Q" ? I have talked so much about it, in relationship with you, but surprisingly you have not dealt a word on it.

You mean your puny brain is so clouded with opium from your ancestry that you cannot digest that short story ???
42. 2009-04-13 23:00  
big deal you leave the state your no longer married, "DUH!" as american cartoon hero Homer Simpson says...the right for people being able to have their relationships validated should be made federal with states falling into line, as always those in Polygamous relationships are never given the same recognition either, time to end the great lie by those promoting monogamy as the only legitimate relationship model

请先登入再使用此功能。

Social


请选择新闻及专栏版本

精选个人档案

Now ALL members can view unlimited profiles!

Languages

View this page in a different language:

赞好

合作伙伴

 ILGA Asia - Fridae partner for LGBT rights in Asia IGLHRC - Fridae Partner for LGBT rights in Asia

Advertisement