Becker and Norton, a couple for 18 years, filed a notice of intention to marry in Massachusetts days after the state began performing same-sex marriages in May 2004. But they were denied a license after state officials cited the 1913 law.

In March, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that Massachusetts could use the 1913 law to bar gay couples from Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont from marrying here because those states explicitly prohibit gay marriage. But the high court sent the part of the case involving New York and Rhode Island couples back to superior court, saying it was unclear whether gay marriage was prohibited in those states.

Superior Court Judge Thomas E. Connolly heard arguments on the Rhode Island case today. No date has been set yet for a hearing on the New York case.

Assistant Attorney General Peter Sacks argued that Rhode Island statutes use gender-specific terms - including both "bride" and "groom" - and make it clear that their intention is to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Becker and Norton, who are raising two children together, said their desire to get married was a natural extension of their long relationship.

"We feel like the word 'marriage' has a particular meaning of dignity, love and respect. We want that for our families," Norton said after the court hearing.

"It's sad that we have to go to court to get married," Becker said.

Connolly said he expects to issue his ruling in the case within five to six weeks.

In 2002, Connolly dismissed a lawsuit filed by seven gay couples who challenged the state's ban on same-sex marriage. His ruling was reversed by the SJC in its landmark 2003 decision legalizing gay marriage in Massachusetts.

-- The Associated Press