Gay Marriage | New York | News

BigGayDeal.com

Excellent Clip Reel of Yesterday's NY Assembly Debate on Marriage Equality: VIDEO

Bronson

Here are several notable moments from yesterday's debate in the NY Assembly before it passed the marriage equality bill 80-63. Featuring Assemblypeople Joel Miller, Matthew Titone, Michael Fitzpatrick, Deborah Glick, Donald Miller, Dov Hikind, Harry Bronson.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

(via Capitol Confidential)

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. At that same site, looks like no decision was made today: http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/71071/still-no-senate-decision-on-same-sex-marriage/

    I'm not feeling really good about this.

    Posted by: Mike | Jun 16, 2011 12:08:30 PM


  2. Rep. Dove Hikind is violating his oath to the Constitution. He swore an oath to up hold the laws of the Constitution, not the Torah. For shame Rep. Dove Hikind.

    Posted by: Andrew | Jun 16, 2011 12:50:17 PM


  3. Michael Fitzpatrick is just a bigot. Allowing LGBT people to marry will not change anything for straight people or couples.

    They sure have their "opinion", but it's not one that they can back up with intelligence and logic.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Jun 16, 2011 12:55:32 PM


  4. And I wonder if Dov Hikind believes that gentiles should be banned from consuming pork products....

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Jun 16, 2011 12:58:49 PM


  5. @Mike: If it's any consolation, one of the most anti-equality senators, Golden, today said he expects it'll come up for a vote, but possibly next week.

    Posted by: Bruno | Jun 16, 2011 1:04:46 PM


  6. It's amazing to me that the opponents of same-sex marriages can only quote the religious arguement as their only reason for not allowing gay marriage. They have no other basis for imposing discrimination other than religious ones. And yet we are a country whose founding fathers saw the importance of separating church and state for this exact reason: that religion wouldn't dictate and decide the rights of the citizens. The arguement isn't so much about changing the definition, which it doesn't. No where has any supporter of gay marriage said, ok if gay marriage passes, no hetero marriages are recognized anymore. The issue is about equality and equal rights for every citizen regardless of sexual orientation. Period!!! As a democratic nation, the first Democratic Nation in the world, we cannot institute a policy that discriminates against a section of our population. Period! What do these religious zealots think will happen if marriage is allowed, on a legal level, not even talking religious level, to occur? the last wall will fall. History will remember those who opposed it very badly.

    Posted by: matt | Jun 16, 2011 1:14:36 PM


  7. It's not much consolation since delay most likely means defeat.

    I wonder if these religious bigots understand how much hatred and intolerance they are garnering for themselves and their co-religionists by continuing to deprive us of our civil rights? I can tell you I've been having some thoughts about these folks that I'm not proud of but - there it is. Hate begets hate.

    Posted by: ant | Jun 16, 2011 1:19:18 PM


  8. @Ant: Right now, there's no guarantee this bill will come to the floor. If the Republicans feel like they don't want it to pass and/or don't have the votes, they will probably choose to not have it come to the floor. Delay is not a huge issue, the issue is whether a vote happens at all.

    Posted by: Bruno | Jun 16, 2011 1:35:09 PM


  9. I know it's the way things are, but it's offensive to see my rights debated at all.

    Gay people don't "deserve" rights because we've met some standard of suffering, we deserve them because we were born with them according to the US Constitution. It's not subject to debate or a popular vote. It's not even "controversial" because homosexuality has been part of the human condition since the beginning of time, not something invented in the 1960s by 'hippies' to piss off traditionalists. It PRE-DATES the religion Dov Hikind cites for his "no" vote, the very same book that excuses slavery. The New Testament is so misogynist it inspired the witchcraft trials and is STILL the reason why female clergy are rare. The Bible has been used to defend slavery, why women shouldn't vote, "Jim Crow" laws, and the right for people to marry others of different races. Even if you're a believer we KNOW the Bible has been wrong. When you don't accept that fact you end up with Adam & Eve riding dinosaurs and a planet that's 6,000 years old, in other words willful ignorance, a rejection of knowledge, science, and medicine.

    At the same time I follow this debate I'm so appalled there IS a debate about this.

    Posted by: Codswallop | Jun 16, 2011 1:53:45 PM


  10. I think it's hilarious that they think they're "redefining marriage"

    That's the whole point, there's no 'straight-marriage' and 'gay-marriage'

    It's just marriage, knuckleheads.

    Posted by: Pete n SFO | Jun 16, 2011 7:31:30 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «DMC Calls on Fellow Hip Hop Artists To Fight Homophobia: VIDEO« «