New York governor signs same-sex marriage bill into law

Foxrac

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
44,471
Reaction score
448
Albany, New York (CNN) -- New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the state's marriage equality bill hours after it passed the Republican-controlled Senate on Friday night, making it the sixth state in the nation to legalize same-sex marriage.

Cuomo signed the bill into law after the legislature cleared the way to legalize same-sex marriage with a 33-to-29 vote, the first time a state Senate with a Republican majority has approved such a bill.

The new law, which will allow same-sex couples in New York to marry within 30 days, drew a sharp rebuke from opponents, who spent millions to try to defeat the measure.

"We worry that both marriage and the family will be undermined by this tragic presumption of government in passing this legislation that attempts to redefine these cornerstones of civilization," the state's Catholic bishops said in a joint statement released late Friday. It was signed by Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan and seven other bishops.

Opponents of the marriage equality law have vowed to take political action against any Republican who voted for the bill.

The Senate vote came after days of delays that included last-minute negotiations, passing by a slim margin with the support of four Republicans.

Cuomo credited four Republican senators who joined the majority of the state's Senate Democrats for the passage of the bill, saying they were "people of courage."

"I think it was politically more dangerous for a Republican," Cuomo told reporters late Friday. "The conservative party was threatening them with consequences ... and they did it anyway."

A vote on the measure, which the Assembly passed June 15, has been stalled in the Senate until Friday. But it turned a corner late Friday, according to Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, after lawmakers agreed on an amendment to protect religious groups from litigation that had been pushed by Republicans.

Earlier in the day, the Assembly passed a new version of the bill that included the amendment about religious institutions.

Cuomo said it would grant same-sex couples equal rights to marry "as well as hundreds of rights, benefits and protections that are currently limited to married couples of the opposite sex."

New York, which gave birth to the gay rights movement in the 1960s, will become the sixth state to allow same-sex marriages. Currently, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and New Hampshire and the District of Columbia grant same-sex marriage licenses.

Activists on both sides of the issue gathered in the state capitol, Albany. They chanted opposing slogans -- petitioning for either "marriage equality" or yelling "one man, one woman" in defense of the institution's traditional definition -- though they could also be seen occasionally mingling and even singing religious songs together.

Republicans, led by Skelos, had expressed concerns over the "unintended consequences" of a bill that redefines the legal parameters of marriage. The measure needed three Republicans' votes to pass the bill, which had the support of 31 Senators -- just one short of the number required for passage -- earlier this week.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who courted Republicans to approve the bill, called the vote a "historic triumph for equality and freedom."

"In recent weeks, I have had many conversations with our state Senators. I emphasized that not only is marriage equality consistent with bedrock American principles, but it is also consistent with bedrock Republican Party principles of liberty and freedom -- and the Republicans who stood up today for those principles will long be remembered for their courage, foresight, and wisdom. In fact, 10 or 20 or 30 years from now, I believe they will look back at this vote as one of their finest, proudest moments," Bloomberg said in a statement released shortly after the vote.

New York governor signs same-sex marriage bill into law - CNN.com
 
It is exciting news and first time to see majority republican controlled senate approved the gay marriage with 4 republicans supported.
 
I understand that there is a provision in the bill preventing religious institutions as well as other not-for-profit groups from being taken to court for refusing to marry same-sex couples. If the court finds the provision illegal, then the entire bill becomes illegal. Sounds tricky, but it is a step in the right direction.
 
I understand that there is a provision in the bill preventing religious institutions as well as other not-for-profit groups from being taken to court for refusing to marry same-sex couples. If the court finds the provision illegal, then the entire bill becomes illegal. Sounds tricky, but it is a step in the right direction.

Why would that be illegal? Religious organizations have always been exempted from a lot of things. Churches have the right not to marry them if they don't want to marry them. Some refuse to marry divorced couples.
 
In 8th grade, I learned that the church and the state (government) is supposed to be separated.

But it never really is, is it?
 
In 8th grade, I learned that the church and the state (government) is supposed to be separated.

But it never really is, is it?
Not if the government tries to interfere with religion. As long as the government stays out of the churches (and other religious meeting places), they'll be in line with the Constitution.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
 
Not if the government tries to interfere with religion. As long as the government stays out of the churches (and other religious meeting places), they'll be in line with the Constitution.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

The Congress is NOT allowed to stop anyone from practicing their religion but it's not allowed to establish religion either. Theocratic governments establish religion or no religion and prevent people from practicing other religions. Take a look at Islamic countries and communist/fascist countries.

Thomas Jefferson made it more clear by stating that there should be a separation of religion and state. James Madison further said the same thing. They both have enormous influence on development of the Constitution.

That's why we should strive to stick with the ideals of our founding father's framework - no religious tests, no God, no Allah, no Buddha - government must be completely neutral and should not promote a religion at all.
 
The Congress is NOT allowed to stop anyone from practicing their religion but it's not allowed to establish religion either. Theocratic governments establish religion or no religion and prevent people from practicing other religions. Take a look at Islamic countries and communist/fascist countries.
That's why we have the First Amendment--to keep the government out of religion. We don't have a Church of America the way the British have a Church of England.

Thomas Jefferson made it more clear by stating that there should be a separation of religion and state. James Madison further said the same thing. They both have enormous influence on development of the Constitution.
They added their opinions but the Constitution is the only legally binding document.

That's why we should strive to stick with the ideals of our founding father's framework - no religious tests, no God, no Allah, no Buddha - government must be completely neutral and should not promote a religion at all.
I'm not sure what you mean by "no God, no Allah, no Buddha." The Constitution doesn't say that.
 
That's why we have the First Amendment--to keep the government out of religion. We don't have a Church of America the way the British have a Church of England.


They added their opinions but the Constitution is the only legally binding document.


I'm not sure what you mean by "no God, no Allah, no Buddha." The Constitution doesn't say that.

No, the Congress passed law to require in God We Trust on currency (clear violation of the Constitution) and "under God" on pledge.

The separation is merely a point to clarify their thinking when framing the Constitution. We understand the Constitution better when we know their intentions.
 
No, the Congress passed law to require in God We Trust on currency (clear violation of the Constitution) and "under God" on pledge.

The separation is merely a point to clarify their thinking when framing the Constitution. We understand the Constitution better when we know their intentions.

Good point...
 
:laugh2:
No, the Congress passed law to require in God We Trust on currency (clear violation of the Constitution) and "under God" on pledge.

The separation is merely a point to clarify their thinking when framing the Constitution. We understand the Constitution better when we know their intentions.

I think that use of God in currency and pledge the flag is much harmless and it doesn't affect me, even I have mixed feeling about believe in the God.

However, I agree about some laws are too religious, such as restricting on abortion and banning on gay marriage or other unions are considered as religious but restricting the abortion may be part of practice to increase the birth rate to make more birth than death ratio. It seems not work at all because of there will be illegal abortion if legal abortion is restricted or banned.
 
:laugh2:

I think that use of God in currency and pledge the flag is much harmless and it doesn't affect me, even I have mixed feeling about believe in the God.

However, I agree about some laws are too religious, such as restricting on abortion and banning on gay marriage or other unions are considered as religious but restricting the abortion may be part of practice to increase the birth rate to make more birth than death ratio. It seems not work at all because of there will be illegal abortion if legal abortion is restricted or banned.

But Netrox's point was that church was supposed to be separate from state meaning no religion involved with govt policies yet we have "Under God we Trust" on our currency. What gives?
 
But Netrox's point was that church was supposed to be separate from state meaning no religion involved with govt policies yet we have "Under God we Trust" on our currency. What gives?

Ok, I don't see as big deal.

Maybe, you should to do lawsuit to get challenge in court to have throw God out of currency and flag pledge.
 
Ok, I don't see as big deal.

Maybe, you should to do lawsuit to get challenge in court to have throw God out of currency and flag pledge.

HUH? I was stating what Netrox's point is. Nothing about me wanting to file a lawsuit.
 
This is very exciting! I can't wait til I see the day same sex marriage becones legal in Texas someday!
 
HUH? I was stating what Netrox's point is. Nothing about me wanting to file a lawsuit.

My post does refer to Netrox too, not just for you.

He can read my post and reply my post if he wants.
 
Ok, I don't see as big deal.

Maybe, you should to do lawsuit to get challenge in court to have throw God out of currency and flag pledge.

We already did but SCOTUS said it's not unconstitutional. I disagree 100%. I think it's biased.

In fact, the Constitution went further to make sure that no religious test be required: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

It doesn't matter if it isn't big deal to you. The Constitution is a secular document requiring that religion be separate from the state.

If it went through that twice then it should give you a clue - no sanctioned religion allowed! Before the Constitution, we had Puritans who escaped from England because of religious prosecution but they set up their own "theocratic" government and prosecuted those who disagree.
 
Back
Top