New York Rejects Marriage Redefinition

Special Report - December 4, 2009
New York state lawmakers soundly rejected a bill Wednesday that would have established same-sex “marriage” in the Empire State. Eight Democrats joined all 30 Republicans in the 62-member Senate to reject A40003 by a 24–38 margin, keeping New York from joining five other states, which recognize same-sex “marriages.” The measure had already passed the New York Assembly (or House), and had the vocal support of New York Governor David Paterson, who had pledged to sign the bill into law, if passed.

The bill, introduced by Senator Thomas Duane (D–Manhattan), who is the legislature’s first openly homosexual member, asserted that, “Marriage is a fundamental human right.” It went on to formally recognize “otherwise-valid marriages without regard to whether the parties are of the same or different sex.” The only Senator to speak in opposition to the bill during a long and heated floor debate was Senator Ruben Diaz (D–Bronx), a pro-life Protestant minister, who has been credited by many sources with killing the bill through his constant vocal opposition focusing on the moral value of marriage and the importance of public opposition to its redefinition.

New York does not allow civil unions, but does have a domestic partnership law that—along with several other laws, executive orders, and court decisions—grants many of the legal privileges associated with marriage to same-sex couples. Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, and Vermont currently allow same-sex “marriage,” and New Hampshire’s law doing the same will go into effect on January 1, 2010. Maine and California previously recognized same-sex “marriages,” but both were overturned by ballot referendum. Forty-five states have passed either statutes or constitutional amendments preserving the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Thirty of those states have constitutional amendments. Every state that has put the question of the definition of marriage on the ballot has preserved its definition as being the union of one man and one woman. North Carolina remains the sole Southern state to not allow a Marriage Protection Amendment to come before her citizens for a vote.

“The definition of marriage should not be construed to be a partisan issue,” said Bill Brooks, president of the North Carolina Family Policy Council. “New York’s arguably liberal legislature made a bi-partisan decision to preserve the most foundational aspect of society by rejecting a redefinition of marriage. North Carolina citizens continue to be denied the opportunity to decide for themselves whether to preserve that definition in our State Constitution. It is past time for the leadership of our General Assembly to respect their constituents enough to bring a Marriage Protection Amendment before the people for a vote.”

Copyright © 2009. North Carolina Family Policy Council. All rights reserved.