---

New York’s Ban on Same-Sex “Marriage” Struck Down by Activist State Judge

NEW YORK, February 7, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com/CWNews.com) – An activist judge of the New York State Supreme Court ruled Friday that same-sex couples must be allowed to “marry.” The state has 30 days to file an appeal. Five same-sex couples seeking marriage licenses in New York City filed the lawsuit last year.

In a 62-page decision, State Supreme Court Justice Doris Ling-Cohan compared the prohibitions against two persons of the same sex getting married with past prohibitions against interracial marriage.

The ruling ordered that the state grant marriage licenses to five couples involved in the suit.

Justice Ling-Cohan also cited the US Supreme Court’s decision overturning anti-sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas, maintaining that, “‘preserving the institution of marriage’ is just a kinder way of describing the State's moral disapproval of same-sex couples.”

Ling-Cohan compared the ban against same-sex “marriage” with slavery and segregation: “Rote reliance on historical exclusion as a justification improperly forecloses constitutional analysis and would have served to justify slavery, anti-miscegenation laws and segregation.”

The city argued that state law banning same-sex “marriage” reflects federal law, as defined by the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, which states, “the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman.”

Ling-Cohan decreed all gender-specific language within the current law be re-interpreted in a gender-neutral fashion.

Catholic World News reports that William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Civil and Religious Rights, said the judge has shown herself to be out of touch with the mainstream of America and has inadvertently helped the cause to protect marriage. He said the ruling "will help enormously in the effort to secure a [federal] constitutional amendment limiting marriage to one man and one woman." He added, "The public is overwhelmingly against the bizarre idea of two men marrying: initiatives to legalize gay marriage lost in all 11 states that had this measure on the ballot in November." He called the ruling "judicial imperialism."

CWNews.com also notes that Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said Ling-Cohona's reasoning, comparing same-sex unions to the legal battle of over interracial marriage, is not apt. He said that prohibiting a man and woman of different races from marriage "was wrong because they were prohibited from marrying even though they met the definition of marriage. Same-sex couples do not meet the definition of marriage. To allow them to marry would require marriage to be redefined. Does a judge have that kind of authority?"

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced he would appeal the ruling to the state Supreme Court.

tv

 Back to Top

---

MORE NEWS: LifeSiteNews.com Home Page  Last 10 Days   Archives   Special Reports

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.