Senator George Maziarz Responds to Marriage Equality Question

[jmaziarz3590]

I do have to say that as a member of the gay community I am thoroughly embarrassed at my uncles response to this matter. I am a soldier of the united states and a hard working man. Why am I different than you in the eyes of the law. Because who I choose to lay with?...... Guess what that's none of your business. And ladies good luck with everything. ... And I apologise for my uncles ignorance and discriminating unrealistic ideals

[ryanlock2u]

It disturbs me that they applauded him. I get that some people are opposed to equality - that's something you have to get used to these days. But to be so malignantly opposed that they applaud the opposition? Let's hope and pray that New York legalizes marriage equality and this won't be an issue any more. Best wishes.

[brucecny]

He cant even explain why?!!! This is a public servant?!! LOL....he cant give a reason because it's nothing but homophobia and discrimination!

[cherrubic]

the reason why he was voting no was because he was going to vote no. it is too bad he could not articulate a rationale.  i would be interested in hearing one.

[bb6f44]

Notice how he basically tells them to stop applauding, as if he realizes that he's wrong.

[lalaflister1]

what an a*&^^$#*)(@ !

[166beads]

talk about epic fail on the response!

[HeyItsMattN]

Maziarz is a piece of shit and a coward.

[nathancwalker]

Dear Anne Tischer & Bess Watts,

I am so proud of you. Your question was masterful - in tone and in content. I am so sorry that the Senator's response was so discriminatory and supported by the tyranny of the majority.

Keep being such a loving and strong witness for equality and know that you are supported. You are not alone. We will stand with you. Together we stand on the side of love.

Peace,

Rev. Nate Walker

[Animas123]

Thank you Rev. Walker. We often forget that there IS a loving, caring and supportive Christian community. It is a shame the the Extreme Right has claimed a Christianity that has nothing to do with Christ's teachings.

It is a long road - with too many setbacks, but eventually love will prevail. A great straight friend of mine once told me that when you are fighting for civil rights you are always in good company..

Happy Holidays everyone and keep up the good fight!

Bess

[deepraine]

This man must have a heart of stone. To stand there and deny help for a nice old lady, and then to later stand and vote no against allowing Senator Duane to get married in the state he serves...I always thought that it was easy for them because it was a vote against something impersonal to them, something that they didn't have to see the repercussions of. They in NY should know better.

[villa72]

What a fucking tool that senator is. These people charged with upholding the constitution: what a fucking joke. Democracy in America, what a farce.

[tirevan]

What a little douchebag. And people clapped for him. Jesus Christ. What ever happened to minority rights?

[LegalEagleX]

Rampant cynicism and the influence of money in politics to the exclusion of everything else.

[nmratman42]

Minority rights suffer from the "I got mine screw you" philosophy. Highly organized Christianist and conservative groups appealing to people's dislike and fear of the unknown. Populists like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.

Take your pick, and hope to hell you aren't part of a minority that isn't recognized by the federal or state government.

[bobjones864]

This video is pretty much the whole marriage debate in a digestible 3 minutes:

"Marriage is important because it provides people with legal and social protection and gay people shouldn't be excluded. Allowing Gay people into the institution would encourage gay people to adopt more mainstream, even conservative, lifestyles by offering them the same social and legal protections everybody else gets."

"Fuck you."

[LegalEagleX]

Yes, exactly. The issue can only be resolved by

the US Supreme Court - now let's hope that enough of them will rule on the facts and not let their prejudices cloud their judgment.

[bobjones864]

I have mixed feelings. As a point of fact, I agree with you 100%. Not letting everybody marry is just plain old discrimination, not just as an abstract argument, but in people's lived experience. I'm straight, so I can acquire lots of legal rights through a simple contract. Gay people don't have that. Simple.

BUT. . . it might be better in the long run to let this play out the slow, painful way. Repeal DOMA, and let states decide. It'll suck, but the end result will be politically better.

[bobjones864]

That way gay marriage WON'T be the a cudgel for paranoid bigots to use, and it WILL be seen as the legitimate will of the people. Yeah, I know, "tyranny of the majority," and so on.

And you are right.

But we have to keep making the argument, because here's the thing: we have the only legitimate argument. All they've got is bigotry and fundamentalism. There's no turning back. We'll lose more battles (we're losing one in NY now), but history is on our side.

[bobjones864]

That's not to say that if the supreme court did the right thing tomorrow I wouldn't celebrate.

[LegalEagleX]

It won;t work though because in our society there is a relatively high degree of geographical mobility. A couple marries in State A that allows SSM and moves to State B that doesn't recognize it. Assume they have minor children. If the couple divorces, State B will face a dilemma of either exercising jurisdiction to establish child support or else refusing to do so leaving children with no protection. These kinds of legal problems mean fed court intervention is inevitable, and it will come soon.

[bobjones864]

Yes.

That's why repealing DOMA is important.

[bobjones864]

@bobjones864 Just to clarify, I think that DOMA is the big obstacle here, and once we get rid of that nonsense the real debate can begin. It should be a state by state wave of gay marriage. There will be difficult moments along the way, but that strategy would be practically and politically better.

Although, again, if the supreme court ended all the bullshit tomorrow I'd be out in the street celebrating.

[iraz82]

What a sniveling little prick!!! Vote this scum bag out of office, please!

[Jujuman2003]

Motherfucking guy should be voted out of office!!! Heterosexuals who vote against gay marriage are bigots!!!

[digibal235]

It's solipsism. All these politicians hold town hall meetings not to discuss the issues and learn the will of his or her constiuents, but to inform his or her constituents of their sovereign will.

When these people run for office, they always list their stance on issues. They are intractible from the begining.

[RassieDog]

That's what they do - listen to a well-reasoned position and say, "I still think ...". But what can you expect? There is no logical reason to oppose gay marriage.

[InXanadu2]

To Animas123:

under "Tags" add the word, "a**h***" for more easy finding.

[aasign]

Our rights should be on an individual basis. Marriage is a religious agreement, it is not our basis for rights. now for the reason to obtain rights, tax breaks and so forth people want to become married. We don't need government defining marriage, or dividing people up into groups such as married, single, straight, gay , male, female, black, white, and so forth. we are one people and we all should be treated equal as individuals.

[zobear]

@aasign Ummmm, no. It is the state that makes you married, not the church. Sorry.

[wbuwiru]

Real American= believes in protection of minority from tyranny of majority

George Maziarz= against protection of minority from tyranny of majority

Therefore, by the law of transitive properties, George Maziarz is not a real American

[ChoadNamath]

"I'm going to totally ignore everything you just said and vote no on the marriage equality bill!"

[moor4348]

I agree with you completely. She voiced a very well-reasoned argument and he, providing no supporting logic, simply stated he would vote no against marriage equality. How could people in that room cheer his simple-minded reply - oh that's right, they are simple-minded too. When are people going to understand that we should not vote on the rights of minorities. Ending slavery, women's right to vote, and legalizing inter-racial marriage would not have ocurred if put to a popular vote.

[69sumi]

Obviously the dumb shit is a bibary thinker. If it's not this way, then it's that way. How do these dolts keep getting elected?

[dontcoverfeu]

What an f-ing jerk. Politicians who are willing to be so shamelessly dismissive of their constituents have no place in office. I'll definitely get involved in 2010.

[aubreytube]

senator FAIL

[BluMoanin]

This Senator provided the standard answer all bigots have, none. Not surprising given there is no rational justification for favoring continued and unconstitutional discrimination against gay people and their familes, only religiously fueled hatred. This senator favors bigotry over country.

[PaulLeary]

USA, USA #1 in freedom, liberty and justice... but NOT for all!

[pkiverson]

"I believe marriage is between one man and one woman, so screw your family and your rights."

Nice response senator, love it. It's amazing how these right-wing "Christian values" politicians rarely have any sense of Christian compassion or just plain human decency to them.

[oaklandj]

@pkiverson They're also sorely lacking in any logic. He didn't even try to muster a defense, because those cheering him on don't care for any rationale either.

[MentalRob]

How do these un-american right wing wacko nut jobs keep getting elected into office? They want to turn this country into the Christian version of Saudi Arabia... it makes me sick.

[bcinny1]

We need to vote out these bigoted, racist, sexiest, dum ass politicians. Let them get real jobs.

[jongalbreath]

What a piece of human shit. Hopefully he'll be removed from office at the next election.

[DanOLGB]

I guess he doesn't know that the role of a legislature is to serve all his constituents not vote his personal opinion. If you don't like gay marriage, don't have one or don't perform them, but don't violate the rights of individuals and religions that want to.

[AppleNick]

"I'm going to stop you from getting a piece of paper from your county courthouse that could help you and your family."

*people who have no reason to care clapping*

[ctweathers]

When they're faced with real people, their constituents that want their civil rights, these dumbasses don't even have an answer except to stammer that they're against gay marriage. There is no justification for not letting people who are gay and lesbian marry except that you've got a lot of constituents that hate gays and lesbians. So, what State Senator Maziarz did was give into hate. What a loser.

[bathalax]

wow, that was a clear answer innit

[Mangalaiii]

what a monster.

[sparkplugsf]

Ah yes, the "I got my rights and screw the rest of you" response.

[crtamb]

HAHAHAHAH. I think "MR. SENATOR" is a horse's ass. As my grandfather always said, there are more horses asses in the world than there are horses.

[MoreChewy]

I'm sorry, but the audience's clapping in reply to the Senator saying, "I'm voting against marriage equality" just annoys me.

Little do they know that they are clapping in the name of bigotry.

[isit7or13]

Lol at his jerking motion.

[iconeon]

My hat goes off to Anne Tischer for having the guts to stand up for herself and speak for those that cannot speak out. Thanks for being bold and asking the tough question.

[ryerye81]

What a D Bag

[Meatwad650]

I find myself hoping that this "senator" gets a very painful cancer.

[Aizenald]

Translation of the Senator's answer: "I don't give a shit about you or other gay people, I'm going to vote against your equal rights regardless of the fact that I have no constitutional right to do so."

[mistereaves]

.........he didn't even have the spine to look at her in the eye while answering her question and essentially telling her that she's a second-class citizen.

Politicians like the senator you work for and dutifully represent need to be held accountable for their actions, and I'll be doing my part by funding his political opponent to the maximum amount allowed by law as soon as his main opponent announces his or her candidacy.

[mistereaves]

I'm obviously not a constituent of the Senator's, but after watching the internet video of him responding to one of his constituents who happens to be a lesbian, I've decided to pledge as much money as I can to whomever his Democratic opponent is in his upcoming bid for re-election.

Not only is the Senator trampling on the civil rights of that particular constituent by actively voting to deny her equal protection under your state's constitution........

[mistereaves]

I'd urge everyone to contact this senator's office and tell them of your plans to contribute to his opponent's campaign in his upcoming re-election bid.

Phone number: 518-455-2024. Maybe you'll get the same sniveling, sarcastic woman on the end of the line as I did!

And if it helps, I'll post what I told them in another comment.

[timothyjames24]

I am going to make a contribution to whoever his opponent is. It will take time but once the older generation dies off so will their old school bigotry. It is sometimes called the greatest generation but history will look at them as the generation who lived on a charge card and sent the bill to the next generation. A 13 Trillion dollar bill.

[TheSeanSD]

This is always their response, "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman", but the problem is that they don't ever support anything that would insure equal rights. And they expect us to believe that they are not bigots???

[AllegedlyTrue]

He doesn't even qualify his "feeling" with any argument against this woman's plea for equal protection under the law. It's just a matter of time before fools like these are shamed by the American public for this type of bigotry. He believes it is OK for gays to be discriminated against and that's his answer plan and simple. Because that's what his "feelings" are. SHAMEFUL.

[rg0057]

That man is a piece of crap. And what is that hand motion at 3:07-3:10? Does he do that a lot? Masturbating loser.

[disneylandman66]

YEAH! What is with the hand gesture? He's already enough of a jerkoff without the pantomime. The woman's plea and argument are very real, very eloquent, and sharply illustrative of what is at stake here. He doesn't care, let alone comprehend, anything outside his shitty little existence.

[arobinsonuk]

Not an ounce of substance to his response. For shame, "senator".

[duckumu]

what a heartless response he gave. absolutely shameful.

[dorchester65]

Please New York; vote this man out of office.

[mikey683]

kenballer00 please prove to us what you have done to deserve the rights you have you incredible tool.

[SoyLocoMoco]

Thank you Anne and Bess for asking the question with such grace. Too bad Senator Maziarz can only respond with his "feelings" instead of what he is required to do as a Senator, which is protect all of his constituents regardless of if he finds them distasteful. You could easily go back 30 years and find many people who "felt" that interracial marriage was wrong. That was not a good enough reason to stop it back then, and the same reasoning applies to gay marriage.

[Hdtexan]

Anne, Bess, you are courageous people. Mazriaz is a bigot and a coward. Vote this disgusting creature out of office.

[Infundibular]

I'm tearful after watching this. The sheer absurdity of it is beyond comprehension. And there are people clapping about this?

Welcome to the dark ages.

[zulmia]

This is what continues to frustrate me about the whole marriage debate: there are no arguments against same sex marriage that I've seen except for the "four leg good; two leg bad" that this ignoramus trots out.

[zulmia]

I think you've got burden of proof mixed up. It should go (in a sane world):

1) Here is X that some person or group of people want to do

2) People can do X unless there is a compelling reason not to. Compelling reason not to includes: infringes on someone else's right to property and/or life. A compelling reason would NOT be: Because my kid might someday hear about it, because my religion said says it's icky, etc.

That was the whole reason for the ninth amendment.

[zulmia]

Do you see you're the one saying that an arbitrary group of people can't do something?

You'll trot out the "they can marry within their race just as I can" canard, but I hope that's self evidently not a reliable method of ensuring equal rights to the population.

[kenballer00]

gays are not animals or robots. they have freewill to marry someone of the opposite sex and even if they didn't have freewill it still would not justify labeling their relationship something that its clearly not because it is biologically impossible for same sex couples to procreate and rear-children NATURALLY. its not about being straight or gay to be able to enter the institution. its about whether you can help society as a whole.

[Infundibular]

Part 1

It is also "biologically impossible" for certain heterosexual couples to procreate. Where is society's condemnation of them? Not only is this irrelevant to the discussion, since having/raising children is not a prerequisite to obtaining a marriage license, it's also applying a double standard to same sex couples.

[kenballer00]

this is the is/ought fallacy by David Hume just because there are situations like infertile couples does not prove we ought to have gay marriage

besides, letting infertile couples get married does not change the definition of marriage because you are still promoting the same product by design. if a computer comes out to be broken, do we no longer call it a computer NO!!!

It does not matter what the couples end up doing with the marriage license; we are talking about the states perspective here

[Infundibular]

Part 1

I'm not arguing that gay and lesbian couples 'ought' be able to get married because infertile heterosexual couples can. I addressed the issue of infertile heterosexual couples being able to marry because it contradicts -your- rationale for -excluding- gay and lesbian couples from marriage.

[Infundibular]

Part 2

You yourself argued that gay and lesbian couples should (ought to?) be denied marriage because they cannot procreate. Yet you refuse to apply your standard to heterosexual couples. You argue that this exemption for heterosexual couples is acceptable because it doesn't 'change the definition of marriage'.

Unless I'm mistaken, what you're now arguing is that the 'definition of marriage' is more important than it's actual function, which I can only guess you would say is procreation.

[neenerpuss]

Who wrote the definition? Straight people! That means its DISCRIMINATION!

When boys play a game with a ball and hoops...we call it basketbal. When girls play a game with a ball and hoops its called basketball. The players have changed...they game is still the same. The participants do not define the game. MARRIAGE IS THE SAME!

[Infundibular]

Part 2

"its not about being straight or gay to be able to enter the institution. its about whether you can help society as a whole." This statement requires further explanation. Why are same sex couples and families not able to 'help society as a whole'?

[bradcerenzia]

Because kenballer00 can't imagine anything outside his tiny little brain. Dollars to donuts he claims to have "gay friends" but can't get ONE to vouch for him.

[Infundibular]

Part 3

The massive flaw in this in entire argument is that it conflates being fertile with being "of value" to society, two entirely different things:

I could sleep with and impregnate 12 different women over the next few weeks if I wanted to and completely ignore my responsibility as a father. Are you arguing that just because I can do that I would be more deserving of marriage than someone who was committed to their same sex partner and was perhaps supporting and raising a child?

[kenballer00]

i am not going to buy into your straw man argument

[Infundibular]

An extreme scenario, perhaps, but it demonstrates the absurdity of your position. Why do heterosexuals couples and their families deserve more protection than gay couples and their families? The implication is that gay couples are worth less to society, and the only defining characteristic for such a judgement is their ability to procreate, a standard not applied to heterosexual couples and utterly irrelevant to their value or worth.

[zulmia]

I'm not seeing the straw man kenballer00. What I see is an argument illustrating that your arguments basically boil down to Special Pleading. Please point out how (and specifically where) your arguments have been mischaracterized.

[talkingstatue]

kenballer00 probably is the victim of a Catholic education and has no idea what a straw man is. I doubt he knows the difference between rhetoric and logic either.

[bradcerenzia]

Because you're an idiot. You can't use some worn out, false argument you heard on Glenn Beck and then not follow up. You're the straw man, kenballer00.

[talkingstatue]

kenballer00,

You're a fucking moron. Gays can raise children. Young hetero shits like you fuck around and leave the your little bastards for the rest of society to take care of. Gays can and do adopt them and raise them or, at the very least pay their taxes to support these kids. Fuck you for claiming we contribute nothing.

[MikuruBeamu]

What a terrible man.

[stevenssofierce]

wow all the bigots clapped and the senator is a complete ignoramus right there after she said it has nothing to do with religion duh so don't give ur personal view point like saving society ugh i can't stand discrimination and ppl who use religion 2 justify it so annoying

[milindoe]

As I have said so many times, the irony of putting civil rights up for vote in a supposed "democratic society" is lost on the likes of Maziarz and those who loudly applauded his vow to vote against marriage equality.

[patrickometry]

Powerful video. The absurdity and blatant irrational bigotry which allows this politician to confidently proclaim his plan to vote against equality for lgbt citizens smells like a stinking pile of ...

[mgoss85]

this is one of the most disturbing videos i have EVER seen. how are we gay people any less than straight people? we were BORN gay! why are we being treating so inhumanely? and for people to clap for such a cowardly and discriminatory answer is appauling at the least...

[SpeedyBruin]

He did not answer her question. She specifically asked how he would vote and why. He did not justify his vote and why he does not wish to extend these civil protections to families in need of them. It's unfortunate that so many of our elected officials continue to support discrimination.

[SpeedyBruin]

Furthermore, shame on those who loudly clapped right in front of that woman who just laid out her heartbreaking story. That is rudeness on a level I'm very uncomfortable with.

[mgoss85]

civil rights should never be put to a vote. if thats how things are done the 50's era discrimination may still be alive and well....

[SpeedyBruin]

I agree completely