By Mark David Blum, Esq.

New York’s Court of Appeals abdicated its responsibility and the buck has stopped at our new Governor’s desk. He has promised to sign a Gay Marriage bill. So, the question is now asked whether “marriage” should be limited to just a mixed gender relationship.

Laws requiring marriage be defined as a ‘man/woman’ relationship are blatantly unconstitutional. Our nation is founded on principles of personal freedom and the liberty to live life as we choose. We expect to be free to speak, to express ourselves, to gather, and to believe (or not) in our respective god. These fundamental principles have held us together as a nation for more than 200 years.

Nationally, each election cycle, the TheoCons bring the question of Gay Marriage before the Courts and the voters. The Right is always pushing for Federal and State constitutional commands that ‘marriage be solely a heterosexual union’. The Party of God seeks to make dominant the dogma of one religion while excluding and defiling the beliefs of many others. They reject 200 plus years of keeping religion from controlling government and instead, become more Taliban-esque in our construct.

There are churches in society who will marry non-traditional couples. As a matter of secular law, the State must recognize those marriages. We owe it to all the People of this nation to treat all of us the same and to make sure that whom you love does not have to withstand the religious scrutiny of the few. The fourteenth Amendment demands nothing less.

Limiting marriage to a man and a woman is a religious belief. It is one founded in Christianity and for so very many years has become the norm. Christian dominionism wormed its way into civil law in that no State presently sanctions marriage for other than one man and one woman. States like Vermont and Massachusetts have created a new legal animal called ‘civil unions’ that give marriage-like rights and benefits to non-heterosexual couples. But, the concept of a civil union misses the main point of the issue. “Separate but Equal” is a major social policy failure.

Society has no interest in assuring that marriage remains a heterosexual relationship. We cannot succumb to claims that marriage is about procreation when we tolerate couples to be legally married who do not intend to have children, who cannot have children, or who are post-childbearing. There is also no basis that marriage has to be between man and woman “because that is the way it has always been done” when we live in a world where slavery, pedophilia, and imperialism were likewise once the norms.

If you read New York’s Domestic Relations Law (what matrimonial lawyers refer to as the ‘Lawyers Full Employment Act'), it is obvious that even “way back when”, Legislators here did not feel that gender was a proper limitation for Marriage.

For example: Article 2 is the section of the Domestic Relations Law which defines an illegal marriage. That section does not include non heterosexual relationships. One would assume that our government, when first pondering what should not be sanctioned by the State as a ‘marriage’; ‘same sex’ was not among those factors specifically banned. Section 11(4) defines what is and is not a valid marriage and again, gender is not listed as a pre-requisite. Note too section 12 where it uses "husband" and "wife" in reference to the oath that must be taken. That section does not specify the gender of the speakers of that oath. “Billy Ray, will you be my awfully wedded wife?”

The bottom line is that any attempt to distinguish between heterosexual and gay marriage is one based on religious doctrine and not objective law. Our own State does not preclude gay marriage and at best, the Domestic Relations Law is ambiguous.

New York already recognizes Domestic Partner relationships. Recently, while in conference with a Judge in a divorce matter, my opponent who represents a prison guard said, ... very much to the dismay of the Judge and myself ... that the State of New York, in context of providing benefits to State employees, has a policy of providing medical and other benefits to what are defined as being "Domestic Partners". What she said was that the State of New York and the Department of Corrections recognize the concept of Civil Unions and provide benefits for such partnerships. Apparently, the only criteria is that the partners be living together for 12 months. It does not matter if the relationship is straight or gay.

This nation is best served when its People are happy and at peace. A couple, of any construct, who have pledged their love and mutual support for each other “til death do them part” will be more productive and less of a burden on all of us. We owe it to ourselves and the legacy we leave for future generations to work toward this goal. Anything less constitutes repression and oppression based on religious theory.

Let us be the great People that we are. Let us learn to accept and tolerate those who do not think or live as we do. We are a pluralistic nation and as such, there has to be room for more than one idea. My idea is that we allow anybody to get married to anyone they choose. From those unions, our nation will thrive and grow and find enlightenment.

Oh, and of course, with Gay Marriage ... comes Gay Divorce ... and that is always good for business.