The Flag of Equal Marriage: Jan 1, 2010

    Newer Older

    This is an evolving protest flag for equal marriage rights in the United States. The stars on this flag represent the states that, as of January 1, 2010, will actively perform same-sex marriages. Stars are arranged on the blue field in order of each state's admission into the union. Read more about our project at The Flag of Equal Marriage!

    The stars are:
    Massachusetts (#6) - May 17, 2004
    Connecticut (#5) - Nov 12, 2008
    Iowa (#29) - Apr 24, 2009
    Vermont (#14) - Sep 1, 2009
    Maine (#23) - Sep 14, 2009
    New Hampshire (#9) - Jan 1, 2010

    Patrickometry, mike137137us, raphmaz, and 50 other people added this photo to their favorites.

    1. Patrickometry 70 months ago | reply

      Hi, I'm an admin for a group called GCRM Photo Collection, and we'd love to have this added to the group!

    2. LissaKay 70 months ago | reply

      The Covenant of Marriage was made by God. Not the state. People have been getting married for thousands of years. The state only butted in recently.

      Why do gays need the state's permission in order to be married? It is GOD that they should be petitioning for this right.

      If it is just the civil, legal, financial and tax rights and responsibilities they want to have, that can be set up with an attorney - something like a legal partnership with limited powers of attorney.

      Why are we fighting about this?

    3. M Volpe 70 months ago | reply

      LissaKay - I must say you seem pretty unaware of the real issues here. Let's put religion aside for a moment - as not everyone believes in God. So - what are we left with? The civil aspect of marriage. Right or wrong, our society adopted the responsibilities and covenants of historical marriage and applied them to an entire nation. This is the reality. An attorney? Please - do some research - Do you really think a legal partnerhship arranged by an attorney is going to prevent job or housing discrimination? NO! Or allow a woman to adopt a child her partner gave birth to? NO! A legal partnership isn't going to award Social Security benefits to someone based an arrangement made with an attorney. This would require, literally, an act of congress.

      In my faithful practice and beliefs - it isn't God who has an issue with Gay marriage - it is the people who claim to speak for him that do. And, unfortunately, a lot of our politicians are these very people. The God who loves me celebrates the love and commitment of two people and blesses them with grace.

      So - no - I don't ASK PERMISSION from the state to have the very same legal rights as any heterosexual couple - I DEMAND the state stop preventing what is, by definition in the US constitution, an inalienable right! The pursuit of happiness and equal treatment under the law for ALL!!!!!

    4. koitz 70 months ago | reply

      This is a great idea!
      We should also stop paying taxes since we are second class citizens.

    5. xavierzu48 70 months ago | reply

      you should know that there are also gay people outside the united states.

    6. orlando a. 70 months ago | reply

      at first i was confused: why the big dipper?! But actually it's a great concept

    7. one plus two 70 months ago | reply

      I really like this! A flag-in-progress.

    8. artist unknown 70 months ago | reply

      I like it...hopefully NJ will pull through soon!

      Also, re: LissaKay, your claim that marriage is a thousands-year-old religious rather than political institution is not borne out by history in the least. For the first HALF of Christian history, it was not (and keep in mind that before that, under the pagan Roman empire, it was a non-religious institution). It only became a function of the church when the European kings' rampant polygamy became an embarrassment to the papacy and they finally tried to force them to knock it off by essentially taking it over during the reign of Lothair II. The history of marriage is not the unchanging ideal that people would like to believe. In fact, as late as the 11th century the church still sanctioned polygamous marriages (the Norman invasion may never have happened if the previous king of England hadn't had two wives!). I don't support polygamy, but it's necessary to keep in mind that marriage is no unchanging institution, but something that has and will continue to change with the times. And that's not a bad thing.

    9. Bricey2008 69 months ago | reply

      I like this design and also like the submission of ballanross but both of these flags are relevant only to the States and the gay flag should be a universal symbol.

      The submission by Irish Blonde is my favourite so far.

    10. torgie02 69 months ago | reply

      i LOVE this concept. i have 2 ideas as offshoots of this one

      1) since there are six stars, and also six colors in the rainbow, i think the stars should be rainbow, one color each. you could either do it from left to right, so it looks like a rainbow, or you could designate red for the first state to have marriage equality, orange for the second, etc.

      2) the only real problem i can see is the one the founding fathers had with this flag- you would have to change it each time a new state was added. so what if instead you just left all the stars white except those with marriage equality, which could be rainbow in the way i mentioned earlier. then you could just color in the new stars yourself, as they come.

      also, please do not feed the trolls

    11. kldicksonwisc 69 months ago | reply

      LissaKay, marriage existed LONG before the people who thought up your imaginary friend did.

    12. stonecold_brody 65 months ago | reply

      Sadly, this needs updating. We're back down to five stars, thanks to Maine.

    keyboard shortcuts: previous photo next photo L view in light box F favorite < scroll film strip left > scroll film strip right ? show all shortcuts