New York State: Consensus Reached on Religious Exemptions in Gay Marriage Bill

Strikes me as a sensible way to enact the measure:

[/quote]

 

Top five reasons gay marriage should be legalized by Adam Carolla...

1. Because they're tax-paying citizens and it's their right.
2-5 - So they'll shut the fuck up about it.

 

Vote in the New York State Senate should come tonight:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/25/nyregion/new-york-state-senate-to-vote-on-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=1&hp

 

Says it all:

All the best to my friends in NY state.

 

2-5 won't happen because it's on to the next state, and the next, and the next, even Cali, where voters had their say.

Again, if you don't have level liberty at age of consent, this should be a state-to-state issue too.

 

Two different issues, but the bottom line is that it is a state-to-state issue and one more state is about to get it right.

That said, I am very curious how the language protecting religious institutions from having to recognize same-sex marriages is going to work. I agree that it is the right way to go, but it seems like there could be some complications.

 

Wouldn't the full faith and credit clause of the U.S. Consititution require that states recognize other states' same-sex marriages?

 

Just passed in the State Assembly, though they had already passed an earlier version. The State Senate has been the real obstacle all along.

 

They still need one vote in the Senate.

 

Really? The voters had their say. So then it's OK for the voters to declare anything and as long as the majority says OK, then it's the law of the land, regardless of what they vote for.

With that philosophy, it will become the law in some state to outlaw inter-racial marriages. Guarantee you the majority of some state would pass that.

The courts exist, in part, to prevent a tyranny of the majority. The majority cannot pass laws that violate the rights of others.

So what other arguments are out there against legalizing gay marriage? Religion? Tradition? Procreation?

Don't use tradition as an argument... Inter-racial marriages have been legal for roughly 50 years. Women could vote for around 100. And blacks were 3/5 of a person until 150 years ago. All those "traditions" were repugnant and wrong and no longer exist.

Don't use religion as an argument... Gay people don't want a religious marriage. They want a marriage that gives them the legal rights that married couples get. Tax breaks (joint returns and inheritance), assumed power of attorney, insurance coverage, etc. Take all those away from married couples today and maybe you have something. The one thing you'd definitely have is a revolt. And married couples voting out their legislators who voted for such a thing.

Don't use child-bearing as an argument... If that were the case, DINK couples wouldn't be legally married, nor would senior citizens who marry. Only procreating couples.

So what else is there? What other possible reason is there? Be glad to refute those for you as well.

 

Here comes the vote...

 

Looks like it will pass & be signed into law by Cuomo:


@CapitalTonight -- Capital Tonight

Sen. Saland, who is explaining the religious exemptions right now, key undecided, IS THE 32nd VOTE according to Gannett.