NYS Senator Eric Adams speaks on the Marriage Equality Bill

[Shotglass1362]

Thank you Senator Adams. You have stood up, and you are indeed an agent of change. Thank you.

[skeisaul]

Thank you!! This is MY Senator and I am so proud!!

[brianh406]

WOW voting on Civil rights.....................

[LoveToday8]

Geomike99, while I like your idea, I hate that there is so much separation between those who are married and those who aren't in terms of rights.

Churches shouldn't have an objection to marriage equality because they don't grant the legal protections that come with marriage.

[deepraine]

Marriage has been more governmental or social rather than religious. There's no reason to change state marriages to civil unions. If anything churches should change the names of their ceremonies.

[wotwotcake]

5:21-5:52 - Brilliant. All politicians should take notice of these words and put them into practice. Separation of church and state!

[326742]

Thank you Senator Adams.

[rigso321]

This guy is great!!! Thank you for leadership!

[InXanadu2]

LOL @ "I believe [Sen. Diaz] is taking his position from his heart--and not his mind."

You got that right.

[CharlieHipHop]

if we deny people the right to marry because xtian fundamentlists don't approve of what they do in the privacy of their bedrooms, nobody will be allowed to marry.  Everybody's got something "freaky" going on.

[hiseminencegris]

I am moved and thankful for Senator Adams clarity and witness. Years, decades, from now his principles and kindness will be remembered just as the bigots who voted No today will find their names live in infamy. I live in Ireland. I have heard his voice from thousands of miles away.

[osher121]

What is so hard to understand? I, a single male, am prohibited from marrying my sister, my brother, my aunt, or any close relative. I am also prohibited from marrying any woman who is already married. When I get married, I will be prohibited from marrying anyone else in the world. Am I being discriminated against?

Why is it "discrimination" that there are certain people that one cannot marry?

[supersingerevan]

You don't realize why those particular things are prevented. Marrying relatives is illegal because the children that would be created would run a severely high risk of having birth defects and/or genetic diseases. It also decreases genetic variety. It is unfair to the child. Polygamy is banned because history has shown polygamous relationships to have an "alpha" wife; there is inequality within the marriages. However, there is NOTHING to show gay marriage would create any inequalities.

[syzygywell]

it isn't hard to understand but your argument is fallacious and disingenuous. Being attracted to a family member isn't exactly like being gay either and to equate the two is silly. Being gay is a more than likely an innate trait while this supposed army of sister, aunt, brother lovers to which you refer are making an incorrect "lifestyle choice" and have a personal problem. I expect next you'll bring up something about animals and children 5...4...3...2...1.

[osher121]

Absolutely. Once you open marriage outside of what it really is, where do you stop? If you create a "right to marry whoever you want" then one person will want to marry a non-relative person of the same sex, another person (who might be sick but still he wants to-who are you to stop him) will want to marry his grandmother. Face it. There is no right to marry whoever you want. Some people are allowed to get married and some people aren't. and people of the same sex cannot marry each other.

[LaSelik]

For what reason?

There is a reason behind the ban on marrying relatives, but what logical reason can stand behind a ban on same sex marriage?

[tugboat2030]

So all of us have to ask ourselves is gay marriage more alike incest and bestiality or is gay marriage more alike interracial marriages?

I'll go with the latter.

[weinerdad]

Marriage is a legal contract that creates family.

Your family members are already kin by blood and law.

When you marry someone who is not a blood relative, that person becomes your legal next of kin.

It's hard for you to understand because you're too stupid to choose not to be stupid. I wish you could marry someone in your family so that you could be taken out of the dating pool. God help whomever it is that ends up in a relationship with you.

[SeanChapin1]

That was a marvelous speech. I've got tears in my eyes. Thank you for sharing your voice of reason to not just New York but the entire world.

[moderndaybeatlefan]

That was an amazing speech. People like Senator Eric Adams give me hope.

[hardcore4parkour]

Senator Eric Adams hit the nail on the head! All Americans are EQUAL!

Thank you Senator Eric Adams for your support! You are amazing, and well spoken! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

[jimgiaimo]

There is marriage equality. A single man can marry a single woman with consent.

That's marriage.

[warrenpaine]

All discrimination has its roots in ignorance. People often fear what they don't understand or perhaps struggle against within themselves. Taking the time to educate oneself about others is the great antidote to prejudice and discrimination. Eric Adams proved in this courageous speech that he definitely gets it. Its WRONG to discriminate against others for what they are and can't change, whether it be because of their skin color or their sexual orientation.

[marathongirljess]

Great speech!

@semi62141 is right on.

I do not understand how people think they are being for equal rights if they won't let gay people legally call their relationships the same thing that heterosexual people can. It's offensive to think "civil union" or "domestic partner" equals "married." The social weight of the term "marriage" is powerful. It's separate and unequal, even if the technical rights are the same (and in most states they are not).

[Goodbklyn]

Proud of my NY State Senator today! Thank you, Senator Adams~

[JoeMyGod]

Thank you, Sen. Adams. You make me proud to be a New Yorker.

[summersonset]

What beautiful words this great man speaks.

[geomike99]

"Sen. Eric Adams, a Brooklyn Democrat, said that most of the 31 states Diaz cited as voting against same-sex marriage 'at one time or another sold blacks into slavery.'"

I'm from California, brother, and we voted down gay marriage, too- without denying rights. Gay couples are GUARANTEED equal rights under CA law; the Prop 8 debate was about what term should be used, not whether or not to award or remove rights.

You don't get to play the black card to just make your opponents go away.

[geomike99]

Perhaps you misunderstand me, sir.

I believe the most appropriate compromise to the gay marriage debate is to rename the government institution "Civil Union" rather than "marriage."

Both straight and gay couples would receive Civil Unions under the, complete with identical rights and responsibilities.

If you want to be "married", go to your church- keep the government out of anything labelled "marriage" and the religious objectors will not have anything to complain about anymore.

[summersonset]

geomike, Im truly sorry, I indeed mistook what you said to be an indication of something it is not. I encountered a lot of homophobia yesterday online, and really had enough of it and in your case judged too quickly and wrongfully. Please accept my apologies.

[syzygywell]

well they shouldn't have anything to complain about but trust me they will. Since in my belief it really isn't about protecting marriage like they say it is. It is about keeping gay people unacceptable and unequal. They want us denied benefits and rights. They want us invisible so they can be comfortable.

[supersingerevan]

It seems easy to think that is a fair compromise. However, that is "separate but equal", and separate is inherently unequal. It needs to be understood that marriage is not a religious institution. Otherwise, atheist couples could not marry either. And if we're gonna call it a "civil union", let's do that for all couples, and see how straight couples react to that idea.

[geomike99]

Sir, that is exactly my proposition.

I propose that ALL couples, be they gay or straight, receive a Civil Union from the government. No one will get a "marriage" from the government anymore, only a Civil Union.

If you want to get married, you still can. However, you will have to go to a private institution- like a church, synagogue, or mosque- to do so.

In this way, all couples will receive the exact same rights and responsibilities under the law, and with the same label: Civil Union.

[supersingerevan]

Well, that does appear to be logical; but I seriously doubt an idea like that will ever come to fruition. No one is going to want their marriage referred to as a civil union, and do you know why? Because it sounds like a downgrade. And any congressman that votes for that idea will have almost no chance of being re-elected, and would never take that risk. I really fail to see how marriage is "sacred" in any way (based on how we treat it), so I fail to see why it should be a religion-based term.

[flcadam]

Agreed. I can tell the difference between race and sexual orientation. Why can't liberals?

[semi62141]

He is talking about the common link of fundamental discrimination. Blacks didn't have the civil right to marry back then, and now, would you see ANYONE propose a bill to ban black marriage? No, because we, as a society have come to realize that this is the way it should be. What Sen. Adams is saying is that it's inevitable that we will grant universal equality. We cannot discriminate against gay marriage just as we don't discriminate against black and interracial marriage. Its as simple as that.

[flcadam]

There is a fundamental difference here. The previous bans were based on SKIN COLOR. We denied a man and a woman to get married because of SKIN COLOR, even though they met all other requirements to enter the institution. A ban on gay marriage is based on the fact that the two parties do not meet the requirements based on SEX. Marriage has been understood as an institution between a man and a woman. So the comparison is political hyperbole.

[supersingerevan]

No, sexual orientation and race are the same in the sense that they are inherent in a person by birth; they are NOT a choice (any thoughts otherwise are incredibly misinformed, as this has been all but made fact by scientific experiments). It is wrong to discriminate against something that is completely and utterly beyond someone's control.

[flcadam]

Yes, and some people are born with terrible diseases. Does this mean that every black person has an obligation to equate their entire life and cultural history with that as well?  Just because something is inherent by birth, does not make it analogous to other birth traits. BTW, your last point opens you wide open for the "if I'm a serial killer by blood" attack.

[supersingerevan]

I'm going to take this one point at a time. Last time I checked, we still fully protect people born with diseases at birth. Suggesting that I am saying skin color is a birth disorder is just a ridiculous perversion of my words. Also, you have little to no understanding of psychological disorders. There is no evidence to support serial killers are inherently that way; that is usually developed. And since that can be cured (and being gay can not, and is not a disorder), they are not the same.

[flcadam]

1. I'm just going off of my friends who are pursuing higher degrees in psychology. They've told me that there is physical evidence(ie from brain scans) that psychological disorders are biologically rooted.

2. I don't believe that sexual orientation is a fixed status. I've known many people who've tried homosexuality and now are straight. I think the gay rights lobby conveniently coined the "born that way" rhetoric for political gain.

[supersingerevan]

1. I'm just going off my father, who has been a psychiatrist for 30+ years. What you are referring to is ADHD, autism, higher CHANCES of having depression etc. Depression, bipolar disorder, schitzophrenia, etc. is almost always caused by one's environment.

2. Those who have supposedly been turned "straight" have not been "cured"; you cannot "cure" homosexuality. But they have been scared into believing that they are wrong, and must fight against who they truly are. I find that disgusting.

[flcadam]

1. Fine, then I'll drop the mental health point.

2. Not everyone who stops being gay does it to please society. Have you lived in a city with a gay community? I've known people who's families are cool with it but they want out because of the drugs, drama, and limited dating pool. I've even known lesbians who've ended up marrying men and have no problem with their choice.

[supersingerevan]

It may be true that people will decide not to pursue their true feelings due to circumstance; that's not an argument for it being curable. Just because something can be denied doesn't mean it needs to be. The Declaration of Independence says we are entitled to the pursuit of happiness, and denying one's self will not make one happy. In fact, the reasons you presented only enforce why we need marriage equality: homosexuals need to be treated as equals before these problems will begin to decrease.

[semi62141]

First off, this issue is NOT a hyperbole by any means. It is at its root the debate on basic rights guaranteed to every man (and woman for that matter). What you are trying to argue here is flawed and shallow minded in my opinion; civil rights for everyone makes perfect sense. Let's think of it this way - Did Eric Adams choose to be born black? Obviously not. Even with the rights he has, I'm sure that he has been discriminated against more as a black man than if he was white, per se...

[semi62141]

...So what the American government finally came to believe is that there is nothing wrong with being black. Do you think there is anything wrong with it? If you do, then society outcasts you as a racist. Eric Adams also says that he is straight, which is as far as we know the majority. If he did have a choice to be straight or gay, do you think he would choose to be gay? Absolutely not, because he would face an ungodly amount of discrimination...So why then do you think Sen Tom Duane is gay? ...

[semi62141]

He didn't choose to be that way. But given the circumstances, he became proud of it, and because he's accepted it, he does his best to lead as normal of a life as he can. He even went so far as to find someone to love! Straight people find people to love all the time and no issue has ever come of it! So if black people can love one another, why can't gay people? And to address your argument, yes, traditional marriage was limited to man and a woman. Even in the bible it says this. ...

[semi62141]

However, this country was founded on freedom. The original settlers came to America to practice their own religion. (let's call this "traditional religion.") During WWII America opened its arms to Jews fleeing their homelands. Here, they could practice their religion and live in peace. Sure, people who followed the "traditional religion" may have discriminated against these new people, but there were laws protecting them. That's what people are fighting for now, is equal rights under the law.

[flcadam]

Okay, I read all four of the comments. I don't disagree with the freedoms. But I think it's underhanded for the gay rights lobby to continually compare SSM to civil rights or their condition to that of blacks. They're being manipulative and they know it. Most of them don't really give a d@!! about minorities or their history in this country. I can tell you from experience, gays have NO PROBLEM accessing education, jobs and wealth. So they need to stop exploiting communities that do.

[flcadam]

Let me try this again. Currently, marriage is an institution between a MAN and a WOMAN. Eric was born black, but he can still get married as long as he marries a WOMAN. it can be a white woman, a green woman, whatever- he just has to choose a WOMAN to meet the requirements. Gay people can meet the requirements for this institution if they choose a partner of the OPPOSITE SEX. If they do not, then they do not qualify for marriage.

[deepdrewboo]

@flcadam straight people can marry people they are attracted to and love. gay people cannot marry people they are attracted to and love. that is unequal.

Did you graduate from Kindergarten?

[supersingerevan]

The first amendment protects freedom of religion, and not all religions go by the bible. Therefore, one religion can not dictate the laws of this country; one religion can not determine the definition of marriage. And if you're politically against changing definitions, I believe the U.S Constitution has 27 of those.

[flcadam]

I'm getting derailed from my original point. Not that I oppose gays, but that I don't like them comparing SSM to the civil rights movement. I think it's in poor taste to compare the two.

[supersingerevan]

I will restate my original response to your point. They are indeed similar because they are both discrimination based on inherent traits. And things used to be much worse for the gay community; the LGBT community has made headway. Not that long ago, it was ok to fire someone for being gay, and assaulting someone for being gay was not considered a hate crime. But 75% equality is not 100%. We still have Don't Ask, Don't Tell, we still don't have marriage equality.

[marathongirljess]

The institution of marriage has evolved over time. It was a financial arrangement between families to protect or promote social stability. Then it became a union entered into by choice between two (heterosexual), usually with the blessing of the families involved. If you married across class, religion, cultural or racial divides, it wasn't easily accepted. Now it generally is.

Gay marriage is just the next step. Two people marrying by choice, who happen to be homosexual.

[flcadam]

That's an argument I can buy. But I cannot stand the over-the-top comparisons made to the civil rights movement. I go to school on a majority white college in Colorado and cringe when the gay kids immediately start comparing gay marriage to some aspect of the civil rights movement. Especially when they tend to be hypocritically prejudiced and don't know a thing about the movement beyond what they were told in grade school.

[neenerpuss]

Certainly the 10% of homosexuals did not make the law to exclude only them from marriage. Rights of a minority MUST never be up for a vote of a majority. That only creates APARTIED!

Its like 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. Sad and Pathetic that you are so homophobic.

MARRIAGE EQUALITY NOW!

[Eddie2275]

This is how politicians should be!

[whatifitwasyou]

RIGHT ON.

[XOhSoAlyson]

Yes osher21, gays can get jobs and an education, but his point is they are being denied rights. I completely agree with him, any human being in the US being denied rights is wrong, no matter how many people think it isn't. America knows now how unfair and horrible we treated slaves, I can't wait until the day all americans are shocked that gay marriage was even a debate. I am very disappointed in the NYS today.

[eviegarland]

This make me proud to have Eric Adams as my senator. I'm glad he has taken such a strong stand, and am so disappointed in the NY State Senate as a whole today.

[osher121]

By equating the pro-gay marriage movement to the civil rights movement, you are making light of the whole civil rights movement and disrespecting its heroes including Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Medgar Evers along with many others. Gays can go to school, get jobs,,, it's not even close to what blacks in America went through.

[youthdecay411]

This isn't the Oppression Olympics. All oppression is wrong. There is no point in comparing two struggles.

[geomike99]

Shame on those who voted this comment down- he has a point.

[Douglas10011]

Thank you Senator Adams for your eloquence and understanding of this civil rights issue.