NYS Senator Eric Adams speaks on the Marriage Equality Bill

Senator Adams speaks on the Marriage Equality Bill
Albany, NY December 2, 2009

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Senator Adams
• Marriage Equality Bill
• nysenate

[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.

[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.

[Shotglass1362]

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

[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?

[skeisaul]

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

[brianh406]

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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[wotwotcake]

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