NY Senate Fails to Vote on Gay Marriage

Advocates and Opponents Say Measure Didn't Have Enough Votes Despite Governor David Paterson's Support

(AP)  After weeks of uncertainty and pleas for action by Gov. David Paterson, New York's Senate failed to vote on a bill legalizing same-sex marriage during a special session Tuesday.

Advocates and opponents say the Senate lacked the 32 votes needed to approve the measure, which Paterson strongly supports and the Assembly already passed.

By evening, Paterson put same-sex marriage on agendas for new special sessions for Monday and Tuesday. Later, standing with supporters of the bill, Paterson said he had a commitment by the Senate to bring the issue to a vote by the end of the year, although its outcome remains uncertain. He urged senators who support the measure to ignore "an almost cowardice about battles."

"I implore them that I would rather see an up or down vote, than no action at all," the governor told reporters. "Historically, I think we have lost touch with how movements of equality were reached. There were a lot of ups and downs," he said, citing the civil rights movement as an example.

"If this bill is put on the floor, there are a lot of people whose consciences will let them vote for the bill, but who just don't want to stomach all the activity around them if they take a position before the vote," he added.

The Rev. Jason McGuire of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, which opposes same-sex marriage, called it a "crushing blow" to same-sex marriage advocates.

"I'm a little hesitant to call it dead yet," McGuire said. "It's never over until it's over ... but if they had the votes it would have gone to the floor."

McGuire acknowledged the issue could re-emerge before Jan. 1, but said he doubted lawmakers would be inclined to consider it next year, when they all face re-election.

McGuire said last week's special election for New York's rural 23rd Congressional District showed a resurgence in the power of the Conservative Party, which opposes gay marriage, and "marginal" incumbents won't want to risk their seats for the issue.

In the congressional race, Conservative candidate Doug Hoffman forced the more moderate Republican nominee, Dierdre Scozzafava, to suspend her campaign by passing her in the polls and in fundraising. Hoffman narrowly lost the race to Democrat Bill Owens.

The bill's sponsor, Sen. Thomas Duane of Manhattan, refused to comment even on whether he wants it to get to the floor, where approval is uncertain.

When asked if he feels the bill will eventually be approved, he said: "I'm very optimistic."

The Senate convened and adjourned after less than 30 minutes, the vast majority of which was spent honoring members who were military veterans. Same-sex marriage wasn't debated or on the agenda.

Paterson has said he would sign the measure into law and pressed senators to follow the lead of the Assembly, which passed it earlier this year. Legislators said Tuesday they may return next week as well as in December.

The leading opponent of the measure in the Senate, Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr., a Bronx Democrat and conservative minister, said he was prepared to strongly oppose the bill and the governor, who promised its passage this year. Diaz said he canceled a cruise with his wife this week - Tuesday is her birthday - and lost a deposit "because of this governor."

The measure wasn't brought to the floor after the Assembly acted in the spring because there weren't enough votes in the 32-30 Democratic majority to pass it. A few Democrats opposed the bill on religious grounds.

It's likely some Republican votes will be needed for passage. Republican leader Dean Skelos of Nassau County has released his members to act as they see fit, freeing them from the usual practice of bloc voting.

[greenlantern1]

Dear Sirs,
Not one of our founding fathers was a Mormon because the Unchanging Word of God had not yet been written! It would have been miraculous if they could have read the Book Of Mormon!
An unholy alliance of Baptists and Mormons is now preaching to us what politically correct marriage is.
was the fiasco of the Mormon sect in texas that long ago?
Does anyone remember the Hughes loan?
Clifford Spencer

[Void_Master]

by endurorob_5 November 11, 2009 3:28 PM EST

I must depart.

***

All right. Well next time then. I should go too. I have a laptop to set up for someone.

Have a good one, fellow debater.

[Void_Master]

by endurorob_5 November 11, 2009 3:27 PM EST

I am apposed to this health care reform on many levels. First I believe the mandate to by insurance is likely unconstitutional but the courts will let it get by on the interstate commerce B.S. Secondly I don't think it is right that I should be forced to subsidize insurance for those who are unwilling to improve their situation so they can afford their own, I put in 22 1/2 years military service to get my affordable health care. I don't feel it is right to tell an insurance company that they should cover the treatment of a pre existing condition. And much more I am apposed to.

***

So what do you plan to do about it? Just submit? After all, it is the law (or soon will be).

[endurorob_5]

I must depart.

[Void_Master]

by endurorob_5 November 11, 2009 3:13 PM EST

You were referencing the Foundation Trilogy. These refernces do not come from the foundation trilogy. One is actaully from "Foundation and Earth" and the other is from "The Naked Sun". "The Naked Sun" was the second book with Elijah Baley and R. Daneel Olivaw.

***

I see.

Ok, so you want a more realistic scenario to comment on. Fair enough.

You don't seem any more inclined to like the direction of the U. S. government than I am. So let me ask you, how do you feel about the health care reform and its individual mandate? Do you like the fact that the majority is telling you that you *must* have insurance and what kind it will be?

[endurorob_5]

I am apposed to this health care reform on many levels. First I believe the mandate to by insurance is likely unconstitutional but the courts will let it get by on the interstate commerce B.S. Secondly I don't think it is right that I should be forced to subsidize insurance for those who are unwilling to improve their situation so they can afford their own, I put in 22 1/2 years military service to get my affordable health care. I don't feel it is right to tell an insurance company that they should cover the treatment of a pre existing condition. And much more I am apposed to.

[Void_Master]

by endurorob_5 November 11, 2009 3:04 PM EST

Not short sighted. Just realistic. People are pack animals and the idea that you could have an entire world populated by only ten thousand people is, although entertaining, a bit ridiculous. Studies show people do not do well without human companionship. And the idea that people get to the point that they are so offended by human contact they became asexual is again entertaining but completely absurd.

***

You've lost me. Where did the world population of ten thousand come in?

[endurorob_5]

You were referencing the Foundation Trilogy. These refernces do not come from the foundation trilogy. One is actaully from "Foundation and Earth" and the other is from "The Naked Sun". "The Naked Sun" was the second book with Elijah Baley and R. Daneel Olivaw.

[Void_Master]

by endurorob_5 November 11, 2009 2:59 PM EST

You are talking about a very small segment of society, I would include myself one of them, but unfortunatley the majority need fences and some need cages. Unfortunately most of society are lambs that need to be led and then there are those that feel a need to lead and not necessarily a good type of leadership.

***

That whole thing about one person ruining it for everyone. . . I don't buy it. Just because some fool down the street gets drunk and runs over someone does not mean that I will put with being told I cannot have a beer.

Yes, the segment is small -- but growing.

And again we agree on something: Those prone to take the reigns of political leadership are of a certain breed. It's as though they see it as their role in life to control others -- if only for their own good, of course. Most of them, because of that personality trait are inclined to a power hunger. So I do suspect that they would remain with a statist population.

[Void_Master]

by endurorob_5 November 11, 2009 2:55 PM EST

You would have to segregate the groups to begin with because law abiding members would not tolerate the anrachists.

***

Actually it would not be anyone's call whether or not to "tolerate" the anarchists. Just think of us as part of the local fauna.

[Void_Master]

by endurorob_5 November 11, 2009 2:53 PM EST

I have read it. And in case you forgot the comment I made earlier about Hari seldon and Psycho history is from the foundation trilogy. My favorite series of books by the way. And, it is science fiction.

***

I write science fiction. And the best of stories are those that are not only plausible but deeply rooted in humanity and the human condition. So don't dismiss it just because it is labeled science fiction. Much of what was science fiction twenty years ago is routine today. And if you think a society cannot become so turned around that such as the heterosexual community becomes the oppressed minority, you are very shortsighted indeed.

[endurorob_5]

Not short sighted. Just realistic. People are pack animals and the idea that you could have an entire world populated by only ten thousand people is, although entertaining, a bit ridiculous. Studies show people do not do well without human companionship. And the idea that people get to the point that they are so offended by human contact they became asexual is again entertaining but completely absurd.

[Void_Master]

by endurorob_5 November 11, 2009 2:51 PM EST

this distancing tends to occur in areas where ther are laws that would cause jail time or other punishment for those seeking revenge. In areas where there is little or not law these "family feuds" have gone on for centuries. If you had an entire nation or world of now law enforcement I have little doubt this type of behavior would be the norm until the people decided to create laws and law enforcement to stop it. Like I said we don't have laws just because. Laws come from necessity.

***

Again, I speak of a people who do not need a fence to know right from wrong and then act upon it.

[endurorob_5]

You are talking about a very small segment of society, I would include myself one of them, but unfortunatley the majority need fences and some need cages. Unfortunately most of society are lambs that need to be led and then there are those that feel a need to lead and not necessarily a good type of leadership.