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

Since my "preference" would have no bearing on the outcome, what's the point in having one?

The preference should be for your child to be happy. To be in a healthy, loving, supportive relationship. You should hope he/she laughs often and has a good group of friends. You should hope they remember to call their mother at least once a week. It means a lot to her.

Who they have sex with should be pretty low on any list of priorities.

And, if they are gay, you should hope they don't face undue obstacles, prejudice, and hate. You should hope society accepts them for who they are, values them for their character and talents, and does not judge them based solely on who they sleep with -- who they love.

And, the odds of that got better last night.

A gay person born today will grow up in an entirely different world than a gay person born 50, 60 years ago. And they will owe a debt to the people who fought, at their own peril, for acceptance, equality, and -- yes -- marriage.

The tide has turned. This is happening.

 

Huh?

It is much better that this is happening through legislation rather than judicial decree.

I understand it's not easy to be patient, but this is much more legitimate and will be better accepted.

I'm pretty sure Pride Weekends/Pride Parades are happening all over the country this weekend. I know it's this weekend in Chicago and a news report mentioned that it is going on in NYC too.

You'd almost think it was planned that way, but it was just the end of the legislative session.

Going to be a lot of celebrating this weekend.

 

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

Love this response.

 

We don't agree much, but this is spot on. Well said.

 

Smokers do have a right to pollute their bodies. They just don't have a right to do it where next to other people who don't want their bodies polluted. Because then, you're violating other people's rights to keep smoke out of their bodies.

 

The two GOP senators who switched their vote Friday may get some heat from their constituents at first, but I can't see much after that. Far be it for me to extol the virtues of a blue-state Senate, but at least they came to it after some debate and back and forth.

I'm not afraid on this board to say I'm Republican. That said, it's going to happen. Soon, this will be law of the land. Future generations coming up don't think this is a big deal. So yes, I guess you could say this is for votes. I have friends in the gay community and while I wouldn't do this... let's just say I'm focusing my energy more on fiscal policy and the economy, because that's how the GOP will get elected in the future.

 

When I have kids, I won't care if they grow up gay or straight. 'Long as they're happy, I'm cool.

 

The other thing about the question: Did he actually think there was a chance that the answer would be, "Oh, I never thought about it that way and it's fine for other people's kids to be gay but not mine"? No, printdust, we have actually thought about this, and that's why we *do* support it.

 

Translation: A church that believes homosexuality is sinful cannot be punished for refusal to perform a same-sex ceremony, which has happened in some states (being threatened with removal of tax exemptions, et al). It is common practice for churches to refuse to perform ceremonies for couples who are behaving in ways the church does not approve. Most common is churches refusing to perform ceremonies for couples who are already living together.

Have also heard about wedding photographers being slapped with lawsuits for being "unavailable" for same-sex ceremonies.

That has been the biggest problem a lot have with gay marriage. Do what you want, but for those who believe homosexuality to be sinful, don't force them to approve of it. And a lot of the debate has centered not just on acceptance of practice, but approval.

 

Exactly.

 

With the support of 29 Democrats and 4 Republicans.

 

Why can't you just be happy?