You'd be surprised how common it is for two young miitary people to get married so they can move off base, file jointly, get BAH (base allowance for housing), BAS (base allowance for sustanence). Shit, I personally know several gay couples in the military...a gay man marrying a gay woman for better "cover" so no one would suspect anything. Seriously.

_________________

Um, what's stopping two people from doing the same thing right now?

_________________
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Hockey Night in Buffalo

Sean Avery is also on board (check out those glasses!)

http://eye-on-hockey.blogs.cbssports.co ... 6/29175489

_________________
This time, like all times, is a very good one, if we but know what to do with it.
--Emerson

CV, Phil, Squanto, DP, Fly...

Well maybe I should switch jobs to insurance/tax fraud. I've worked with HHS before in regard to prescription fraud, but perhaps insurance fraud is more rampant. Definitely more fun to investigate...lol...

"Have you slept together? Tell me about it...verrry sloowwwly."

I treat everyone the way I expect to be treated.....


I can't wait to run up to him on the street and wave my hands around two inches from his face.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/arti ... y=nav|head

ALBANY — Roughly 1,000 gay-rights advocates rallied at the Capitol Monday, hoping to convince the GOP-controlled Senate this is the year to make same-sex marriage legal in New York.

While the Democrat-led Assembly has passed legislation twice before, the Senate voted it down in 2009, when Senate Democrats had a 32-30 edge over Republicans. No Republicans voted for it, and a number of Democrats were opposed to the bill.

Power in the Senate is 32-30 in favor of the GOP now, but more pressure has been brought to bear this year by Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who has made passing a same-sex marriage bill one of his top three priorities for the remaining weeks of the legislative session, along with a property-tax cap and ethics reform.

"This is not a political issue. This is not about Republicans and Democrats. Marriage equality is an issue of civil rights, a basic issue of civil rights," Lt. Gov. Robert Duffy told people who attended the Empire State Pride Agenda's LGBT Equality and Justice Day.

The lieutenant governor said elected officials have a responsibility not just for what they personally believe in but for all the people they represent, "and we cannot represent all New Yorkers if we are closing the door on something so important."

Scott Reif, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, R-Nassau County, said the GOP has not discussed gay marriage in conference yet. "We plan to do so over the next few weeks and we'll make a decision based on where the numbers are," Reif said.

Jason McGuire, president of New Yorker's Family Foundation, said he remains confident that same-sex marriage will not be made legal in the state. Voting yes would be "political suicide," particularly for Republican senators, who represent most of upstate, he said.

McGuire's foundation, which believes marriage should be between a man and a woman, kicked off a "Mayday for Marriage" RV tour of the state in Elmira on Saturday and will arrive at the Capitol for a May 24 rally.

McGuire is also executive director of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, an evangelical Christian lobbying group.

Sen. Ruben Diaz, D-Bronx, is opposed to same-sex marriage and voted no on the legislation in 2009. An evangelical Christian minister, he is hosting a "Rally to Protect Marriage" this Sunday in the Bronx.

Ross Levi, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda, said members of the LGBT community and their friends and allies, such as the New York Civil Liberties Union, had a simple message to deliver to government officials: "We will not be disrespected by our own government. We will not be second-class citizens here in our own state," he said.

Polls have shown that close to 60 percent of New Yorkers want marriage for same-sex couples, Levi said. There are two more "yes" votes lined up in the Senate than two years ago, and four senators who were against it last time now are uncommitted, he said.

Sen. Tom Duane, D-Manhattan, who is gay, criticized Senate Republicans because none will publicly say whether they support gay marriage. In 2009, some Senate Democrats and every Republican "betrayed" supporters of same-sex marriage, he said.

Monday's rally was not just about gay marriage. A second issue people were lobbying on was the Gender Express Non-Discrimination Act - GENDA - a civil-rights bill for the most vulnerable parts of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, said M. Dru Levasseur, a Lambda Legal attorney.

"Trans people face severe discrimination, harassment and even violence on a daily basis, from their workplaces to their homes to just walking in the streets," he said.

Supporters of gay marriage and transgender rights from around the state attended Monday's rally.

Angela Maddalone, a Presbyterian pastor from Yorktown Heights, Westchester County, said it's important for people of faith to speak up in favor of same-sex marriage. The language of religion is often used in arguments against gay marriage.

"I believe that this is a human right regardless of what your faith beliefs are," she said.

She is pastor of the Palisades Presbyterian Church in Palisades, Rockland County. It is a More Light congregation, meaning it disagrees with the national church's efforts to restrict lesbian and gay people's participation in church life.

Jennifer Gravitz and her wife, Donna Lemcke, traveled to Albany from Brighton, Monroe County, to participate in the rally and lobbying. They had a meeting scheduled with Sen. Joseph Robach, R-Greece, Monroe County, but they instead met with an aide, Gravitz said.

Robach has been a long-time supporter of civil unions and has said he does not want to change the definition of marriage.

Gravitz, an associate professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology, said she and Lemcke were married seven years ago in Toronto. "We advocate for each other because we want full rights as American citizens and we want to be recognized and supported and acknowledged as equal to heterosexual married folks, including Senator Robach and his wife," she said.

Gravitz, 53, said she was barred from being with Lemcke and a few years ago when Lemcke had a medical emergency. Lemcke walked out of the hospital healthy, "but I'm still haunted by that," Gravitz said.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

Fixing insurance and Medicare fraud would save billions. But, hey, you might as well enjoy yourself while doing it.

On the same note, college students would probably not take advantage of getting married because they would lose coverage on their parents' health insurance and would have to pick up their own. Of course, it's a moot point if they don't have health insurance and have to pay for it in the first place. That would be enough to deter me from doing such a thing, though.

http://www.wnyc.org/articles/its-free-c ... democrats/



If and when the New York state legislature votes on a bill allowing same sex couples to get married, all eyes will be on the Senate, where every similar effort over the past five years has met its demise. Republicans tend to vote against gay marriage as a bloc, while Democrats struggle to present a united front in favor—indeed, insiders perceive that failure to secure enough votes on the Left makes dominoes on the Right less likely to fall.

This time around, there are four Democrats who are either 'undecided' or solidly 'no.' Here's a look at the party's spoilers.
Shirley Huntley (NY-10): Undecided

Huntley was a 'no' vote in 2009, when a gay marriage bill last made the rounds in Albany. The Queens senator maintains that she was voting the will of her constituency, and says she will continue to do so. But Huntley also once said she wouldn't vote for such a bill even if someone gave her a million dollars.

However, she's been non-committal about a repeat 'no' so far this session. Asked in March about legalizing same sex marriage, Huntley replied, “I don’t have any thoughts. I’m thinking about the budget and senior centers in my district. When it comes up, I’ll think about it.”
Joseph Addabbo (NY-15): Undecided

Almost everything said about Shirley Huntley can be said about Joseph Addabbo: he's a Queens Democrat who voted 'no' in 2009 and chalked it up to the will of his constituency. Also like Huntley, Addabbo's on the fence this time around.

“You can probably be listing me as undeclared. I mentioned to pro-marriage equality groups and those in my district, I’m going to talk to the people in my district and get a consensus on where they are,” Addabbo said. “I have actually said we’ll make a better effort this time, to get a more clear idea of where the constituents are.”

Addabbo enjoys a unique position in the State Senate thanks to his name: at the top of the alphabet, he's the first one to vote on every bill. In 2009, that meant the lead-off vote on gay marriage was a Democrat saying 'no.' At least one undecided Republican—Jim Alesi, second in the alphabet and second to vote—said that Addabbo's vote made it instantly clear that there wouldn't be enough Democrats on board to pass the bill. Alesi, who appeared to waver until the last possible minute, wound up voting 'no' with the rest of his party.
Carl Kruger (NY-27): Unclear

Kruger waffled between 'undecided' and 'no' in the run up to the 2009 vote, but ended up voting against the bill.

Due to some legal trouble, the Brooklyn Senator's position on this matter—as well as his sexual orientation—has drawn scrutiny in recent months. Kruger faces federal corruption charges for allegedly using bribes to pay for a mortgage on a waterfront mansion (among other goodies) in Mill Basin, NY, where Kruger spends most of his time with the Turano family: two brothers named Michael and Gerard, and their 73-year old mother. Michael Turano is rumored to be Kruger's secret lover—why else would he be driving a Bentley paid for out of a state senator's coffers, some ask.

However, Kruger's camp refuses to confirm this, and the rumor remains just that: a rumor. Were it true, his 'undecided' position would be especially ironic. Even more ironic would be if the senator decided to support gay marriage, and then didn't get to vote because he's being prosecuted for funneling bribes into his gay partner's wallet. That would be something.
Ruben Diaz (NY-32): No

Ruben Diaz is as likely to vote 'yes' on same sex marriage as he is to announce that he's the secret love child of Elvis and Hitler, both of whom happen to be alive, well, and retired in Boca. A pentecostal minister, Diaz is, will, and has always been a 'no' on gay rights issues; Diaz is even the main organizer of a recently-announced anti-gay march in New York City on May 15th. He held a similar rally in 2009, during the lead-up to the Senate vote on the most recent marriage equality bill to fail.

Notice anything interesting about these senators? They're all from New York City.

State Senator Diane Savino (D-23), a staunch supporter of legalizing gay marriage, may not buy the constituency excuse used by Senators Huntley and Addabbo, but there is some evidence that if pockets of opposition exist in state senate districts, they're most likely to be found in the five boroughs.

The most recent Siena Research Institute poll shows statewide support for gay marriage at an all-time high of 58 percent. Siena then breaks the state down into three regions: New York City, Upstate, and Suburbs. Of the three, NYC has the lowest margin of support for gay marriage, with only 54 percent in favor. Upstate, the number is 64 percent.

Statewide, opposition is also strongest from minority voters. Thirty-two percent of whites are against same sex marriage, compared to 45 percent of blacks and Hispanics, who also make up a significantly larger portion of the NYC population than the total state population.

Income is also an indicator, and Siena finds most opposition to same sex marriage from people making less than $50,000 per year. Median household incomes in the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens all fall below the statewide median of about $55,000 per year, while Manhattan and Staten Island's are higher.

Siena does not have polling data for individual boroughs or senate districts, as the sample size was too small for them to accurately get that micro. That makes it difficult to answer the question of whether or not Shirley Huntley and Joseph Addabbo were really voting with their constituencies when they said 'no' in 2009. While the most recent support numbers based on race and income don't clear them of voting their own conscience, it lends credence to the idea that there's a more substantial population backing them up than their might be in other districts outside the city.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

CONSEQUENCES!!!!!!!

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

Thank God you shared that! I feel way less gay because of it.

Shit...i think i just said I was gay.

_________________

The author makes the case that marriage benefits are meant to be extended to couples that intend to procreate, and that it isn't feasible to exclude the minority of non-gay couples that cannot, or don't intend to procreate, going as far as to imply that allowing a mass of couples to marry that can't procreate would be a drain on the economy. I don't think an author can just make that claim without any sort of research to support the argument, especially a doctoral student in financial economies.

The author also states that love should not be the deciding factor under which parties are allowed to marry, referencing incest and polygamy. Where those arguments hold weight is that there are actual negative effects of incestuous relationships (retarded children), and that polygamy is way more likely to be a supposed "drain on the economy."

Also

http://squashed.tumblr.com/post/4268561 ... y-marriage

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

I think there are holes on each side of the argument, and that this basically comes down to opinion. I don't know the historical basis of "marriage" and how deep the roots of religion are involved. It's safe to say though that our modern version of state sponsored marriage is based in religious values (which I don't partake of). Religion shouldn't have a place in this debate, but the other side of this argument can be taken quite far, and the stopping point boils down to one's own personal opinion and not much more.

If we base whether the state should recognize a marriage on simply whether people love each other and wish to make that personal committment, then why should ANYONE, regardless of age, gender, blood relation, number of partners involved, etc, be blocked from that? Either there should be lines drawn or not, and I don't see much logic in any compromise.

Age - as long as a person is an adult or emancipated they should be able to marry anyone and any number of people if all parties agree.

Gender - any gender and anything in between male and female, to any partner.

Blood relation - shouldn't matter if the partners are prepared to raise a disabled child, if that even happens (there's no guarantee). Who's place is it to say that an incestually concieved disabled child is less legit (and therefore less of a reason to sponsor the incestual marriage) than any other disabled child?

Number of partners - again, if all parties agree and love each other, why should the state deny it?

The same logic that applies to same-sex marriages applies to the above. I don't really care what other people do, but if the lines are re-drawn there's no basis to stop them at same-sex limits. EVERYONE should then have a right to state sponsored marriage.

The slippery slope argument is a weak one, and I think those that use it know it. First of all, the assumption that homosexual marriage is the first in a chain of continually worsening actions is exactly that, an assumption. There is no significant push for any other sort of marriage legalization that people love to use to compare to same sex marriage, i.e. incestuous or polygamous marriages, and no evidence to show that there would be one in the event of same sex marriage legalization. Actually, the fact that same sex marriage is legal in a handful of states and there is no significant push for incestuous or polygamous marriages to be legalized in those states directly refutes that notion.

Plus unlike homosexual marriages, the majority of the country does not support incestuous or polygamous marriages. If there is a line to be drawn, the majority thought might not be a bad place to start.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

The ironic part is that I can't understand a woman to save my life, and I've been married for 10 years. If I thought balls were sexy I would actually be able to understand my partner. Maybe share a little hockey talk, watch a game, pick out window treatments and then hit the local bar for some craft beers. Just saying that maybe these gay dudes and gals have something pretty nice seeing as they don't have to sift through the never ending fucking sea of opposite sex decoding.

_________________

Mine is not a slippery slope argument. I don't suppose that there would be an increase or increase in demand for other marriage arrangements after same-sex marriage. I simply state that the same logic used to justify and sanction same-sex marriage would do the same for these other types of marriages. Whether or not a supposed majority of people agree or not is far from the point. By all logic and fairness and equality, anyone that wilfully wishes to marry anyone else in any number of partnerships should be able to do so and be recognized by the state.

To deny that is to deny all other willing partnerships the same way same-sex partnerships have been denied.

I agree with your point 100%. The majority of people think incest and multi-spouse marriages are a no no but in the terms of what people are comfortable with, how many degrees are they from gay marriage or interracial couples? When it comes to human on human marital agreements I think Uncle Sam needs to get the fuck out of the conversation unless they want to investigate fraud, criminal or citizenship rights. Religious opinion is afforded a place in hundreds of thousands of tax free buildings so stay the fuck off the public lawn please.

_________________

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News ... he_People/

Gov. Andrew Cuomo kicks off a statewide tour in New York on Tuesday to build public support for his legislative agenda for this year, which includes a focus on passing marriage equality. Called the “People First” tour, the campaign will begin in Syracuse and visit various parts of the state in the coming days to rally voters to press lawmakers to act before the session ends in late June.

"Our entire team is going to travel the state to speak directly to New Yorkers about the issues that can move this state forward, and it begins in Syracuse," said Cuomo in a statement that announced the first stop of the tour late Monday. "We need to pass a property tax cap, ethics reform, and marriage equality during this legislative session. The clock is ticking, but when the people speak, the politicians will listen. We will assemble a broad coalition of New Yorkers to support this agenda and work tirelessly to get it passed in Albany."

The governor’s office did not respond to a request for more information about the specifics of the tour, but if the past provides any guide, Cuomo could reference marriage equality in high-profile speeches and deploy deputies to speak with LGBT audiences around the state. Whatever the format, observers say the tour represents a signature strategy of the popular governor and former attorney general, who successfully made his case to the public in order to move lawmakers to pass a budget on time this year.

“I think we’ve seen from this governor that he believes in democracy and making sure that the people are holding their elected officials accountable, are being good bosses of their legislators,” said Ross Levi, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda. “I think he realizes that is a smart way to engage around your legislative priorities, and I agree.”

The Empire State Pride Agenda hosted a lobby day on Monday that drew an estimated 1,200 participants to Albany to urge lawmakers to act on marriage equality and other measures including a long-stalled transgender rights bill. Cuomo, who was in meetings nearby, dispatched lieutenant governor Robert Duffy, the former Rochester mayor and police chief, to address the crowd, while the New York State Democratic Committee released the script of a new robo-call from the governor to New Yorkers in support of marriage equality.

The choices prompted questions in the press, but advocates expressed no concern about Cuomo’s decision not to attend the lobby day, which fits with his low-key pattern of appearances. This past weekend, he skipped the Legislative Correspondents Association show, a must-do event for previous governors, and he declined to attend a fund-raiser for President Barack Obama last month in Manhattan. Within the LGBT community, Cuomo did not attend the Human Rights Campaign gala in New York in February, sending deputy secretary for civil rights Alphonso David to speak on his behalf, and it only became clear at the last minute in October that, as a gubernatorial candidate, Cuomo would attend the Pride Agenda’s Fall Dinner, another important event on the LGBT political calendar.

Viewed against this background, the governor’s absence at the lobby day appears in keeping with the strategy expressed in the “People First” tour that begins on Tuesday.

“Today was clearly a day for the people to lobby,” said Brian Ellner, senior strategist for HRC in New York, on Monday when asked about the governor’s absence. “The governor has been pushing for this bill during the campaign, at the state of the state, and almost every day since, in no uncertain terms, and in passionate terms. We could not have an advocate working stronger on this issue in the state, working harder than he has to get this passed. Today was a day for lawmakers in Albany to hear form their constituents,” he said.

Compared to Cuomo, the last time the lobby day was held in 2009, former governor David Paterson attended and spoke at the event. Later that year, the marriage equality bill lost in the state senate by a vote of 38 to 24.

Calling this year’s effort a “different day,” last week Cuomo said he felt “optimistic” that marriage equality could be passed this session, with a recent poll showing that 58% of New Yorkers support the issue. His office also oversees New Yorkers United for Marriage Equality, the bipartisan coalition of five LGBT organizations working to pass the bill with tactics like lobbying, phone banking and statewide TV advertisements. Business interests and religious leaders also have expressed support.

Despite strong reasons for optimism, marriage equality remains short of the 32 votes required to pass in the Republican-controlled senate, where 26 Democrats favor the bill and no Republicans have publicly announced support. While a historic majority of New York voters support the issue, the same Siena poll last month showed that marriage equality ranks third in importance among voters when compared to the other two Cuomo priorities of ethics reform and a property tax cap, which 52% of Republican voters described as their top priority, compared to 8% of Republicans who listed marriage equality as their priority.

In this sense, as he seeks to pass the marriage equality bill, Cuomo must balance the increasing popularity of the issue with the more delicate political reality, where Republicans are needed to pass the bill, even if they cannot appear to embrace the issue. The strategy of putting the people first and urging them to pressure their lawmakers seems to address this problem.

“I think he is working it behind the scenes,” said Republican consultant Tom Doherty, who served in the administration of Gov. George Pataki. “Why should he be the face of gay marriage? He isn't the problem. I think it's a brilliant political strategy.”

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

http://thenewgay.net/2011/05/enter-rube ... ntest.html

This, and the NYFRF's bitchfest about it made me laugh.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual