It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NY State Lawmakers Nix Gay Marriage Bill

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   

NY State Lawmakers Nix Gay Marriage Bill


www.time.com

ALBANY, N.Y.) — New York lawmakers rejected a bill Wednesday that would have made their state the sixth to allow gay marriage, disheartening advocates already stung by a similar decision by Maine voters just last month.

The New York measure failed by a wider-than-expected margin, falling 12 votes short in a 24-38 decision by the state Senate. The Assembly had earlier approved the bill, and Gov. David Paterson, perhaps the bill's strongest advocate, had pledged to sign it.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Well really I am not surprised. This is an on going battle and will remain so for many years to come unfortunetly.

The funny part is that it's not about equal rights anymore, or the sanctity of marriage, it's now about how much money there is on both sides of the aisle for support or the lack of support.

People have made SOOO much money that they simply continue this charade in the hopes of making more. I think most people understand the concept from the Gay Community and I am sure the Gay Community is ready to compromise on this issue.

All they want is the same legal rights, the problem became so big because a religious institution, marriage, was made into a form of law.

I agree that marriage should stay between a man and woman as that's what the original religions intended it to be and that is their right.

I for one, as a gay man, living in Canada dont' have this problem, however Civil Unions which provide all the same rights is not something that I would argue against.

Thoughts?

~Keeper





www.time.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Separate but equal was found to be unconstitutional.

Until all are equal by law I find we are failing. The concept of one part of society not being the same as another is a disease of the mind that must not be tolerated by rational people.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by Seiko]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Thank you for being reasonable.

Gave you a flag and two stars. Hey that sounds a lot like a meat and two veg.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seiko
The concept of one part of society not being the same as another is a disease of the mind that must not be tolerated by rational people.


And tolerating government intrusion into interpersonal affairs is a symptom of absolute madness.

Government has no business recognizing marriage one way or the other. The sooner people get this through their skulls the sooner we can inch back toward sanity.

The whole "who can marry what" issue is 100% manufactured. It simply doesnt exist. Yet here we are begging and pleading for government to bless this union. Last time I checked government wasnt a parent of my significant other and not involved in any way with whatever faith under which I would be wed. I'm sure as hell not going to ask it for a blessing.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


I agree completely, but as the system is already in place, it's now time to reform it to include everybody.

There's no point in carrying on the broken status quo. Perhaps with same sex reform of marriage they can make it a whole lot better for everybody.

~Keeper



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
I for one, as a gay man, living in Canada dont' have this problem, however Civil Unions which provide all the same rights is not something that I would argue against.Thoughts?~Keeper


As a straight guy, I have no problem with gay marriage whatsoever. I think the demonization of homosexuality is completely arbitrary, and driven by bigotry. Why not afford gays those same rights of marriage? What difference does it make? It's been cool up here...I mean who really cares?

What's offensive is that group that figures supporting a death sentence for Nigerian gays is oky-dokey...them I worry about!


Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Government has no business recognizing marriage one way or the other. The sooner people get this through their skulls the sooner we can inch back toward sanity.

The whole "who can marry what" issue is 100% manufactured. It simply doesnt exist. Yet here we are begging and pleading for government to bless this union. Last time I checked government wasnt a parent of my significant other and not involved in any way with whatever faith under which I would be wed. I'm sure as hell not going to ask it for a blessing.


That recognition is required for same-sex benefits that tie into government programmes, so yes...it does exist. Also, the government is the arbiter of constitutional issues that make gays second class. Sometimes 'we, the people' are arses...need I point out the need for a civil rights movement?



[edit on 2-12-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


Funny enough, it's the only time I approve of our government simply going, "Who the Hell Cares!".

And yes I am worried about that whole Nigerian thing, but each country does what it feels is best, even though we may see it as barbaric and completely wrong ethically.

We can only hope those people are dragged out of their darkness..

~Keeper



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seiko
Separate but equal was found to be unconstitutional.

Until all are equal by law I find we are failing. The concept of one part of society not being the same as another is a disease of the mind that must not be tolerated by rational people.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by Seiko]


A very succinct and accurate analysis Seiko. I am saddened again by the laws that seek to keep up labelled and divided.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by metamagic

Originally posted by Seiko
Separate but equal was found to be unconstitutional.

Until all are equal by law I find we are failing. The concept of one part of society not being the same as another is a disease of the mind that must not be tolerated by rational people.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by Seiko]


A very succinct and accurate analysis Seiko. I am saddened again by the laws that seek to keep up labelled and divided.


Hopefully one day people will realize that having us divided and labeled is the point of these frivolous fights for rights among people.

Only then can we actually remove the crooks who work against us in favor of those who would work with us.

~Keeper



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

What's offensive is that group that figures supporting a death sentence for Nigerian gays is oky-dokey...them I worry about!



Right behind you Johnny! Err wait let me rephrase that.... I do agree with everything you said, living in Canada as I am, however just to be a weeeeee bit picky, it's not Nigeria that is in the news for the "kill the gays" law, it's Uganda. But still being sponsored by those Apostles of love and forgiveness, the K-street "family".



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by metamagic
...just to be a weeeeee bit picky, it's not Nigeria that is in the news for the "kill the gays" law, it's Uganda. But still being sponsored by those Apostles of love and forgiveness, the K-street "family".


Bad news, it's Nigeria as well.

Nigeria's anti-gay witch-hunt The arrest on August 5 of 18 men at a private party in the northern state of Bauchi is the latest incident in a wave of ongoing homophobic persecution in Nigeria - much of which is incited by Christian bishops and Muslim imams...
The men were initially accused of vagrancy, cross-dressing and practicing sodomy as a profession, contrary to section 372, subsection 2(e), of the Bauchi state sharia penal code. A sodomy charge carries a sentence of death. www.guardian.co.uk...


You'd think, though, that the US has a lot more to worry about than who is sticking their naughty bits where.

As Trudeau said, "The government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation."



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by metamagic
...just to be a weeeeee bit picky, it's not Nigeria that is in the news for the "kill the gays" law, it's Uganda. But still being sponsored by those Apostles of love and forgiveness, the K-street "family".


Bad news, it's Nigeria as well.

Nigeria's anti-gay witch-hunt The arrest on August 5 of 18 men at a private party in the northern state of Bauchi is the latest incident in a wave of ongoing homophobic persecution in Nigeria - much of which is incited by Christian bishops and Muslim imams...
The men were initially accused of vagrancy, cross-dressing and practicing sodomy as a profession, contrary to section 372, subsection 2(e), of the Bauchi state sharia penal code. A sodomy charge carries a sentence of death. www.guardian.co.uk...


You'd think, though, that the US has a lot more to worry about than who is sticking their naughty bits where.

As Trudeau said, "The government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation."



I loved Trudeau. Remember that guy who pied him? My brother in law! lol

~Keeper



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
I loved Trudeau. Remember that guy who pied him? My brother in law! lol


"Not that there's anything wrong with that..." Jerry Seinfeld.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


Trudeau had asked for it remember? He said he'd be willing to take a pie in the face as a joke...

So it happened lol.

~Keeper



posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

That recognition is required for same-sex benefits that tie into government programmes, so yes...it does exist. Also, the government is the arbiter of constitutional issues that make gays second class. Sometimes 'we, the people' are arses...need I point out the need for a civil rights movement?



Whatever government sanctioned benefits there may be for married couples (I'm not aware of any outside of taxes that are actually laws, the rest are simply policies and can be changed at any time regardless of what marriage may or may not be) is another non-issue.

Using the excuse "government programs" is admitting defeat right off the bat. We cant do this or cant do that because we'll lose our handout so graciously given by lord government? That's not a call for equality toward liberty that's a call for equality toward tyranny. Like asking your slaver to give all the slaves the same amount of bread. What sort of a win would that be?

Or is it this the point that no one really wants to be free to join in union with whoever they want but rather all of these people whining and fighting the wrong fight just want their great government handout regardless of what government may think of them?

As long as this mythical tie-in of "marriage = rights" exists we'll never be free to be with who we want.

If you want to bring up the civil rights era I'll bite. They won because they ignored government. They saw the signs labeling areas and dictating policies and despite opposition they just ignored the government. Sat where they wanted and went where they wanted. Government spun it nicely for all the slaves out there by stating it would "permit" or "grant" these people the rights. Effectively taking a charge toward liberty and slapping chains on it. Obviously it worked since so many people today actually think they're free and so many people today think that begging for recognition from an entity that has no authority to deny or recognize anything anyone does is how they will become free.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join