[Bbradley62]

6 down, 44 to go.

[matmat]

A small step in the right direction.

[hrothgar]

matmat, on 2011-June-25, 01:49, said:

A small step in the right direction.

I'm hopeful that this is a reasonable large step...
This is the first time that a GOP controlled body approved marriage equity.

(FWIW, I still very much prefer a system in which marriage is a strictly religious ceremony that doesn't have any legal standing. However, so long as church and state are going to co-mingle, I'm very glad that the government isn't allowed to discriminate.)

[Phil]

Surely it will be challenged?

[Bbradley62]

Phil, on 2011-June-25, 09:55, said:

Surely it will be challenged?

Shouldn't be. It's a law approved by the legislature and signed by the governor. It contains all of the reasonable protections for religious groups.

[PassedOut]

Definitely a positive step for America and against oppression. Congratulations New York!

[y66]

Behind N.Y. Gay Marriage, an Unlikely Mix of Forces by Michael Barbaro NYT

Quote

In the 35th-floor conference room of a Manhattan high-rise, two of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s most trusted advisers held a secret meeting a few weeks ago with a group of super-rich Republican donors.

Over tuna and turkey sandwiches, the advisers explained that New York’s Democratic governor was determined to legalize same-sex marriage and would deliver every possible Senate vote from his own party.

Would the donors win over the deciding Senate Republicans? It sounded improbable: top Republican moneymen helping a Democratic rival with one of his biggest legislative goals.

But the donors in the room — the billionaire Paul Singer, whose son is gay, joined by the hedge fund managers Cliff Asness and Daniel Loeb — had the influence and the money to insulate nervous senators from conservative backlash if they supported the marriage measure. And they were inclined to see the issue as one of personal freedom, consistent with their more libertarian views.

Within days, the wealthy Republicans sent back word: They were on board. Each of them cut six-figure checks to the lobbying campaign that eventually totaled more than $1 million.

Steve Cohen, the No. 2 in Mr. Cuomo’s office and a participant in the meeting, began to see a path to victory, telling a colleague, “This might actually happen.”

The story of how same-sex marriage became legal in New York is about shifting public sentiment and individual lawmakers moved by emotional appeals from gay couples who wish to be wed.

But, behind the scenes, it was really about a Republican Party reckoning with a profoundly changing power dynamic, where Wall Street donors and gay-rights advocates demonstrated more might and muscle than a Roman Catholic hierarchy and an ineffective opposition.

And it was about a Democratic governor, himself a Catholic, who used the force of his personality and relentlessly strategic mind to persuade conflicted lawmakers to take a historic leap.

[Phil]

Bbradley62, on 2011-June-25, 10:03, said:

Shouldn't be. It's a law approved by the legislature and signed by the governor. It contains all of the reasonable protections for religious groups.

Challenge does not mean prevail.

Can anyone comment on the appeals process of a referendum compared with a legislative action?

[BunnyGo]

Phil, on 2011-June-26, 12:22, said:

Challenge does not mean prevail.

Can anyone comment on the appeals process of a referendum compared with a legislative action?

I'm sorry to say Phil that you live in one of the strangest republics in the western world. I have no clue how your referendums work or their awkward legal standing.

As for challenging a law passed by the legislature and signed by the governor, it is law. It can be ruled unconstitutional by the state supreme court, but there's nothing in the constitution about marriage. Even if one wanted to try and challenge this, first you'd need to prove standing in the court (prove that you personally have been harmed and have a legal right to challenge the law in court). This would probably be the first big step and would (basically) assure that any legal challenge would be thrown out quickly.

For all intents and purposes, the only going back on this in NY would require the legislature to pass a second law undoing it, and the governor to sign it. Not too likely.

[PassedOut]

y66, on 2011-June-26, 11:41, said:

Behind N.Y. Gay Marriage, an Unlikely Mix of Forces by Michael Barbaro NYT

A great example of practical politics. Thanks for the link.

[hrothgar]

Phil, on 2011-June-26, 12:22, said:

Challenge does not mean prevail.

Can anyone comment on the appeals process of a referendum compared with a legislative action?

Been a while since I lived I New York, but I don't think we had referendums...

[blackshoe]

Far as I know, we still don't. Here's some info.

[Mbodell]

Phil, on 2011-June-26, 12:22, said:

Challenge does not mean prevail.

Can anyone comment on the appeals process of a referendum compared with a legislative action?

New York state doesn't have an initiative process, unlike California, thankfully.

[BunnyGo]

blackshoe, on 2011-June-26, 15:07, said:

Far as I know, we still don't. Here's some info.

And based on how well it's worked for California, be glad that you don't.

[mycroft]

"Stupid activist legislatures. We need a lawsuit!"

[Gerben42]

Tricky question: What happens if a married gay couple moves to a red state? Just curious.

[Bbradley62]

Gerben42, on 2011-June-29, 15:26, said:

Tricky question: What happens if a married gay couple moves to a red state? Just curious.

For now, it depends on the state. Some have laws explicitly saying that the red state does not recognize such things. Court cases will clarify the constitutionality of that.

[mycroft]

Gerben42, on 2011-June-29, 15:26, said:

Tricky question: What happens if a married gay couple moves to a red state? Just curious.

snarky answer: all the red-blooded American marriages in that state collapse from devaluation immediately.

Or maybe not.

[phil_20686]

matmat, on 2011-June-25, 01:49, said:

A small step in the right wrong direction.

I realise I will probably be in the minority on this forum.

[Bbradley62]

phil_20686, on 2011-June-29, 19:57, said:

I realise I will probably be in the minority on this forum.

How do you answer the "rude" question asked of Santorum: do you have any gay friends?