Marriage equality gains momentum in New York

by

The New York Times reports:

Three wavering Democratic lawmakers in the State Senate on Monday announced that they now support the legalization of same-sex marriage in New York, marking a potential turning point for the long-debated measure.

The three senators — Joseph P. Addabbo Jr. and Shirley L. Huntley of Queens and Carl Kruger of Brooklyn — all voted against the measure in 2009, when it failed by a wide margin. Their switch to the yes column leaves all but one Senate Democrat supporting same-sex marriage — and the fate of the legislation in the hands of the Republican majority in the chamber.

“I believe that votes will be there for marriage equality if the vote happens,” Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, a first-term Democrat who has made same-sex marriage a top priority, told reporters at the Capitol Monday afternoon.

Lawmakers will not doubt be chagrined to know that Archbishop Peter Jensen, darling of the Anglican Church in North America, believes they are opening the door to polygamy and incest. Or, perhaps they are serious people and will therefore be unconcerned.

Dislike (0)
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestlinkedinmail
newest oldest
Notify of
garydasein
Guest
garydasein

Craig, Murdoch and I have a marriage license from 2005 from Québec which says "Copy of an Act of Marriage." It does not say "same-sex marriage." Beware of the term "same-sex unions," which is very ambiguous. The Province of Québec, for example offers civil unions and civil marriages to same-sex and sex-discordant couples. The choice of words in the debate over allowing same-sex couples to marry in New York State is very important because more people support equality as a basic principle than do creating what sounds like a whole new category, same-sex or gay marriage. The New York Times is not noted for the quality or precision of its English. Journalism tends toward nominalization so that "allowing same-sex couples to marry" gets abbreviated to "legalization of same-sex marriage" or "legalization of gay marriage." The heading of the Episcopal Cafe Lead says "marriage equality."

As the memo for Assemblymember Danny O'Donnell's bill says, "This bill provides same-sex couples the same opportunity to enter into civil marriages as opposite-sex couples." The domestic relations law would be amended to say "a marriage that is otherwise

valid shall be valid regardless of whether the parties to the

marriage are of the same or different sex."

There is nothing here about polygamy. The question is about the legal sex of two people.

The debate is about allowing same-sex couples to marry in New York State.

New York State voters who believe in full civil equality should phone their state senators as soon as possible. They may find their senators at the senate website:

http://www.nysenate.gov/

at "Find my senator."

Gary Paul Gilbert

Like (0)
Dislike (0)
Craig Abernethy
Guest
Craig Abernethy

I read on the web sometime ago that, after same-sex marriages were legalized in Canada, Canadian polygamists, in fact, sued for legal recognition of their marriages. In addition, a 2005 article in a Canadian legal journal states that " ... the recent legal recognition of same-sex marriage in seven Canadian provinces and one territory ... has led many Canadians to question which conjugal relationships deserve legal recognition. Discussion of broadening the definition of marriage has also led to questioning Canada's traditional prohibition of polygamy." So the idea that legalizing same-sex unions, which I absolutely support, may occasion other changes in a society's understanding of marriage is not really frivolous, for "serious people," in Canada, at least.

Like (0)
Dislike (0)