Well, this is certainly surprising -- but positive -- news. A lot of people
-- including myself -- expected that the state of New York would easily fall
to the gay and lesbian agenda. Apparently not so, at least for now. But I
don't think that the bill failed to pass due to moral issues. It simply
wasn't politically convenient for some of the state senators to support the
bill at this current time. When 2011 rolls around, it may be a completely
different story.

Following is a story from the New York Times:


New York State Senate Votes Down Gay Marriage Bill

By JEREMY W. PETERS - NYT

December 2, 2009


ALBANY -- The New York State Senate decisively rejected a bill on Wednesday
that would have allowed gay couples to wed, providing a major victory for
those who oppose same-sex marriage and underscoring the deep and passionate
divisions surrounding the issue.

The 38-to-24 vote startled proponents of the bill and signaled that
political momentum, at least right now, had shifted against same-sex
marriage, even in heavily Democratic New York. It followed more than a year
of lobbying by gay rights organizations, who steered close to $1 million
into New York legislative races to boost support for the measure.

Senators who voted against the measure said the public was gripped by
economic anxiety and remained uneasy about changing the state's definition
of marriage.

"Certainly this is an emotional issue and an important issue for many New
Yorkers," said Senator Tom Libous, the deputy Republican leader. "I just
don't think the majority care too much about it at this time because they're
out of work, they want to see the state reduce spending, and they are having
a hard time making ends meet. And I don't mean to sound callous, but that's
true."

The defeat, which followed a stirring, tearful and at times very personal
debate, all but ensures that the issue is dead in New York until at least
2011, when a new Legislature will be installed.

Since 2003, seven states, including three that border New York, have
legalized same-sex marriage. But in two of the seven -- California last year
and Maine last month -- statewide referendums have restricted marriage to
straight couples, prohibiting gay nuptials. Pollsters say that while support
generally is building for same-sex marriage, especially as the electorate
ages, voters resist when they fear the issue is being pushed too fast.

In Albany on Wednesday, proponents had believed going into the vote that
they could attract as many as 35 supporters to the measure; at their most
pessimistic, they said they would draw at least 26. They had the support of
Gov. David A. Paterson, who had publicly championed the bill, along with
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and the Senate
Democratic leadership.

The defeat revealed stark divides: All 30 of the Republican senators opposed
the bill, as did most of the members from upstate New York and Long Island.
Support was heaviest among members from New York City and Westchester County
and among the Senate's 10 black members. Seven of the Senate's 10 women
voted for it.

"I'm a woman and a Jew and so I know about discrimination," said
Senator Liz
Krueger of Manhattan.

Senators who are considered politically vulnerable also voted almost
uniformly against the bill, including four first-term Democrats. All but one
of those whose districts border or lie within the 23rd Congressional
District, where the marriage issue erupted in a recent special election,
opposed it. In that race, a Republican who supported gay marriage withdrew
after an uproar from conservatives in her district.

"I think that there were political forces that in some respects intimidated
some of those who voted," said Mr. Paterson. "I think if there'd actually
been a conscience vote we'd be celebrating marriage equality right now."

While gay rights supporters such as Mr. Paterson had prominently pushed for
passage, the opposition was less visible but ultimately more potent. That
was reflected in the floor debate Wednesday: Opponents remained mostly
silent; all but one of those who spoke on the floor supported the measure.

The state's Roman Catholic bishops had consistently lobbied for its defeat,
however, and after the vote released a statement applauding the move.

"Advocates for same-sex marriage have attempted to portray their cause as
inevitable," Richard E. Barnes, the executive director of the New York State
Catholic Conference, said in the statement. "However, it has become clear
that Americans continue to understand marriage the way it has always been
understood, and New York is not different in that regard. This is a victory
for the basic building block of our society."

Several supporters said they felt they had been betrayed by senators who
promised to vote yes but then, reluctant to support an issue as politically
freighted as same-sex marriage if they could avoid it, switched their votes
on the floor when it became evident the bill would lose.

"This is the worst example of political cowardice I've ever seen," said
Senator Kevin S. Parker, a Brooklyn Democrat. "Clearly people said things
prior to coming to the floor and behaved differently."

Republican advocates who supported the bill insisted that the agreement they
struck with Democrats called for Democrats, who have 32 seats in the
62-member Senate, to deliver enough support so only a handful of Republicans
were needed to take such a politically risky vote.

"Several Republicans wanted to vote for this," said Jeff Cook, a
legislative
adviser for the Log Cabin Republicans. "But those Republicans aren't willing
to take a tough political vote when the bill has no chance of passage. And
that's the political reality."

It is rare for legislation to reach the floor in Albany when passage is not
all but assured. And initially, gay rights advocates resisted bringing this
bill to a vote, fearing the consequences of a defeat. But they shifted that
strategy over time, becoming convinced that an up or down vote was necessary
so they could finally know which senators supported the bill.

That was in part because gay rights groups, which have become major
financial players in state politics, wanted to know which senators they
should back in the future and which ones to target for defeat.

Alan Van Capelle, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda, New
York's largest gay rights group, hinted that senators who voted against the
bill on Wednesday could face repercussions. And Christine C. Quinn, the New
York City Council speaker, echoed that sentiment, saying, "Anybody who
thinks that by casting a no vote they're putting this issue to bed, they're
making a massive miscalculation."

Polls suggest that voters in New York favor same-sex marriage, though the
electorate is clearly split. A poll released Wednesday by the Marist
Institute for Public Opinion in Poughkeepsie showed that 51 percent of
registered voters supported same-sex marriage while 42 percent opposed it.

On Wednesday, as news of the vote made its way to demonstrators standing
outside the Senate chamber, some erupted in angry chants of "Equal rights!"
and surrounded a senator who opposed the measure.



Jeff Snyder, SysOp - Armageddon BBS  Visit us at endtimeprophecy.org port 23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Download Center 4 Mac BBS Software & Christian Files.  We Use Hermes II


--- Hermes Web Tosser 1.1