I am a supporter of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. In recent years, with the advent of the “Me Generation” and judicial activism, the cultural élite have relentlessly pursued unfettered individual choice without regard for tradition, the needs of children or nature itself. In 2009, we saw same-sex marriage bills defeated in both the New York and New Jersey State Senates. And in 2010, we saw the successful repeal and referenda efforts across the nation.
While in the Assembly, I fought for tradition when I opposed the marriage equality act. I voted against this bill not only to preserve the rich tradition of marriage but because codifying same-sex marriage would set up a vast and unnecessary legal conflict between sexual and religious liberty.
The Governor’s program bill does not preserve religious freedom. It contains very narrow and unnecessary protection for clergy who do not wish to solemnize gay marriages. No one seriously believes that clergy will be forced, or even asked, to perform marriages they oppose. The issue of “forced solemnization” is a distraction from the real issues of religious liberty that the legislation fails to address.
The bill does not protect religious organizations and individuals from being coerced into recognizing the equivalence of marriage and same-sex relationships against their principles. As a consequence of this law, they may withdraw from important activities, such as education, health care, and social service or risk severe penalties and punishment. These effects will be widespread and devastating to New York in the current economic climate.
These conflicts will spawn years of costly litigation, not only for religious organizations and individuals, but for small businesses owned by conscientious objectors across the state. Passage of the same-sex marriage bill will not end this debate, it will just begin it.
I continue to advocate for traditional marriage and oppose same-sex unions in order to protect the sanctity of marriage. We must not allow the rich tradition of marriage to be destroyed.
[polldaddy poll=5148938]
You do realize that churches won’t be forced to perform same-sex marriages, and all this really happens to be is a legal contract issue regarding giving gay couples rights, no? People won’t stop being gay, they just wont have the same legal rights – that’s legal inequality – that doesn’t change “marriage in the eyes of God.” There’s no rational argument against gay marriage other than being anti-gay.
My post acknowledges your point that churches and clergy members won’t be compelled to perform same-sex marriages. I believe, however, that the law once enacted will have cascading unintended consequences that I alluded to in my posting. During my time in the state legislature, I supported measures that protected all New Yorkers from discrimination based on their race, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation. In this instance, I believe the denial of marriage rights is not anti-gay. Every gay or lesbian person is free to live with whomever they choose, to will their property and assets to whomever they please, to serve in the US military, if they so choose, but legal marrage should and will remain exclusive to one man and one woman.
What if the bill addressed those cascading, unintended consequences – would you then be for legal gay marriage?
The measure can’t and won’t be amended to address unintended consequences. The same could be said of civil unions but that is a nonstarter in the SSM activist community.
Then, do you feel there should be a way to provide gays the same legal protections and rights that only marriage provides, even if it were by simple contract?
If it weren’t a nonstarter in the LGBTQ community, I sure such an arrangement would support of all unmarried couples. NY State Senator Greg Ball has proposed this. There were no takers. It’s all or nothing. Too bad.
Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless
A marriage license in my town costs $29. I tried to price out the drafting of legal documents that approximate the legal privileges of marriage (will, DPoA, etc) with my local lawyers: $1000. Inequality quantatively proven.
This post is full of WIN.
If I want a contract to leave my estate to my dog or my favorite brother etc. I too am forced to pay high fees to a competent lawyer. What’s your point?