<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Gothamist: The Bay &amp;#8594; Gay State</title>
<link>http://www.gothamist.com/2003/11/18/the_bay_gay_state.php</link>
<description>All comments for The Bay &amp;#8594; Gay State</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2007 nyc_daveh</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2007 18:32:49 -0500</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>daveh@gothamist.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>daveh@gothamist.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>Hoofin</title>
<link>http://www.gothamist.com/2003/11/18/the_bay_gay_state.php#comment-12220</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.gothamist.com/2003/11/18/the_bay_gay_state.php#comment-12220</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2003 03:42:10 -0500</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Yeah, this is such B.S.

Without buying into the whole agenda, the fact is that all the fifty states should have allowed for civil registration for the gay couples a long time ago (so-called gay marriage).  There is nothing wrong with allowing a designated person to receive spousal benefits under the state law.  I don&apos;t think it promotes or detracts from society in any way, and is the same typical and understood law of contract that is repeated time and again throughout our nation.

Now that the judges are involved, there&apos;ll no doubt be the same tension and general mess that came about after Roe v. Wade.  This will go on for another fifty-sixty years, and finally the future legislatures will step in and do what they should have done from the get-go.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>