Quantcast

GAY MARRIAGE New Mexico high court debates gay marriage

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 11:36 pm | Updated: 2:40 pm, Wed Oct 23, 2013.

In a signal of the widespread interest in the contentious issue of gay marriage in New Mexico, the state Supreme Court is breaking a longtime precedent by allowing a hearing Wednesday on whether such unions are legal to be streamed live on the Internet.

The five-member court, which seldom even allows cameras in its hearings, has agreed to allow KOAT-TV to broadcast the hearing in cyberspace. It will be the first time the state’s highest court has allowed a hearing to be streamed live.

Subscription Required

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login Now

Need an online subscription?

Subscribe

Login

You must login to view the full content on this page.

Thank you for reading 5 free articles on our site. You can come back at the end of your 30-day period for another 5 free articles, or you can get complete access to the online edition for $2.49 a week. If you need help, please contact our office at 505-986-3010 You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login Now

Need an online subscription?

Subscribe

Login

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 No Alias Commenters must use their real names.
  • 2 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 3 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. and please turn off caps lock.
  • 4 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.

Welcome to the discussion.

5 comments:

  • Margaret C de Baca posted at 12:04 pm on Tue, Oct 29, 2013.

    peace12 Posts: 60

    [yawn]

     
  • Meredith Machen posted at 3:12 pm on Wed, Oct 23, 2013.

    mermachen Posts: 7

    The Supreme Court judges are asking good questions and are very fairly considering the merits of the cases on both sides of the issue, but it is clear that they are seeing through the old rhetoric that same-sex marriages diminish and threaten heterosexual marriages. They keep asking for "rational" evidence. The attorney arguing against marriage equality could not come up with any evidence that marriage in NM was limited to male and female couples was something from 1862. My comment was NM became a state in 1912. An African American woman retorted that slavery was also legal back then.

     
  • Sandy Lynch posted at 2:27 pm on Wed, Oct 23, 2013.

    sandy505 Posts: 13

    You may operate within your church however you wish, but you may not impose your religious beliefs on the population as a whole. Marriage is a legal contract under the law, and it's rights and responsibilities should be applied equally to all competent adults.


     
  • Steven Fisher posted at 11:27 am on Wed, Oct 23, 2013.

    sfisher951 Posts: 25

    The court proceeding was fascinating. The "anti" side trotted out the old canard that marriage is for procreation and that gays have the political power to change the law. The "pro" side pointed out that (a) dozens of children are being brought up in SS marriages and by single parents; (b) that many married couples do not choose to have (or are unable to have) children, yet the state allows them to tie the knot; and (c) that gays and lesbians are still discriminated against and that some movement toward equal treatment does not mean that this goal has been reached. The judges asked the "anti" side repeatedly to provide empirical evidence regarding two things; first, that allowing gays to get married would make it less likely that straights would do so, and (b) that children of gays are less physically and mentally healthy than children of straights. The "anti" side was unable to provide any such evidence. Slam dunk, in my view, for the "pro" side.

     
  • Mark Martin posted at 8:38 am on Wed, Oct 23, 2013.

    mountnbiker Posts: 1

    There is no reason the state should interfere with any 2 adults who love each other and want to commit to one another. There is no way this ruling can uphold marriage discrimination.

     

Follow The Santa Fe New Mexican

Today’s New Mexican, July 23, 2014

To view a replica of today's printed edition of The Santa Fe New Mexican, you must be a subscriber. Get complete access to the online edition, including the print replica, at our low rate of $2.49 a week. That's about the price of a cup of coffee. Or get online and home delivery of our print edition for $3.24. Click here for details.  

Advertisement