Massachusetts ruling for gay marriages fuel's New York advocates

AP Wire (breaking on live feed) | November 18, 2003 | MICHAEL GORMLEY

[NYer]

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) _ Tuesday's ruling by Massachusetts' highest court that same-sex couples are entitled to wed has energized the effort to make gay marriages legal in New York.

``For a lot of legislators who thought they wouldn't have to look at gay marriage for a decade or so ... this is certainly showing New York is behind where they should be in terms of granting full protection for all New Yorkers,'' said Alan Van Capelle, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda, the state's largest gay and lesbian lobbying group. Van Capelle said no special lawsuits are planned in New York seeking to replicate the Massachusetts court ruling, but he did say the ruling will likely fuel civil rights cases. He said gays and lesbians are being denied many of the legal and financial rights and benefits of marriage in New York and other states.

The gay rights lobbyist said decisions like the one Tuesday by the Massachusetts court, and earlier rulings in Vermont, Hawaii and Alaska, offer political cover for politicians reluctant to support gay marriages. But he said these rulings also often prompt a backlash from opponents. That came quickly on Tuesday in New York. ``These are assaults on our culture,'' said state Conservative Party Chairman Michael Long. ``It's an assault on what has been tradition since the beginning of mankind ... So why not recognize three people or four people to be married? Once you go over that line ... you will finish the family structure.''

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, a Manhattan Democrat, said in an interview on WROW-AM radio in Albany that he was unsure if New York's constitution could be interpreted the way the Massachusetts court interpreted its state constitution.

There was no immediate comment from state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, a Rensselaer County Republican. Republican Gov. George Pataki hasn't seen details of the decision and it would be premature to comment, said spokesman Joseph Conway.

Van Capelle predicted Tuesday's decision will be a turning point for gay marriages. It will also increase the number of gay New Yorkers marrying in other states and in Canada and will put pressure on state government, which usually recognizes marriage licenses issued out of state, he added. ``Ten years from now, people will be asking you where you were on Nov. 18 when this decision came down,'' Van Capelle said.

[NYer]

For those who are not aware, Rosie O'Donnell's brother, Daniel, an "openly gay" man, was elected to the NYS legislature in 2002. Here is THAT story.

Election 2002

New York State Legislature

O'Donnell a First in State Assembly

By Noel T. Pangilinan

Nov. 6 -- When Daniel O'Donnell won the the 69th State Assembly seat yesterday, he became the first openly gay man to be elected to the State legislature.

But O'Donnell, 41, a Democrat, was quick to point out that he is not the "first open gay" but the "first openly gay man" to occupy a seat in the Assembly. Democrat Deborah Glick, a six-term Assemblymember representing the 66tth Assembly District, was the first openly gay politician to win a seat.

Garnering 82 percent of the the votes, O'Donnell won handily over Republican Kalman Sporn, Independent Ari Goodman and Green Party's Ronald MacKinnon for the right to represent the 69th District, which covers Manhattan Valley, Upper West Side and Morningside Heights. From a pedestrian point of view, O'Donnell's neighborhood spans from 85th to 125th Street.

For O'Donnell, his victory at the polls proved that being gay is no longer a political risk. "Being gay should not make or break one's election," he said O'Donnell.

Outgoing Assemblymember Edward Sullivan, a Democrat who has represented the 69th Assembly District for the past 26 years but opted not to run this year, agreed that being gay is no longer a significant factor in American politics.

"Being gay is not a liability in this community, it is not a liability in America, in general," said Sullivan, who had endorsed O'Donnell's bid since the Democratic Primary in September. "Every family in America has a member or a relative who's gay. It's no big deal."

But Sullivan said O'Donnell is not the first gay man to be elected to the State Assembly. "There are gays and there have been gays in the Assembly. The difference is that Daniel (O'Donnell) is the first to acknowledge it publicly.

"If the estimate is that 10 percent of the population is gay, then it follows that 10 percent of teachers are gay, 10 percent of doctors are gay. I wouldn't be surprised if 10 percent of Assemblymembers are gay," Sullivan added.

For his part, O'Donnell said that he did not see any reason why he should not acknowledge his sexual orientation. "It's part of who I am, it defines a portion of my life. And also a candidate has to let the public know who his or her spouse is, who their children are, and what his or her campaign platform is. That's part of the full disclosure of the election campaign."

O'Donnell said who has lived with his partner for 22 years. His younger sister, TV and movie star Rosie O'Donnell, recently acknowledged that she is a lesbian.

[NYer]

* * * * *

Daniel O'Donnell (Dem/Wor), a public interest lawyer, is a founding member of the New York City chapter of Citizen Action. O'Donnell, who attended George Washington University and CUNY Law School, is also a member of the Morning Side Heights Historic District Committee, and community board 9. Her ran for the State Assembly in 1998.

[MHGinTN]

IF there were any doubts as to why the seditious democrats are playing obstructionism with Bush's special judge nominees (non-liberal persons who could be on a fast track for SCOTUS nominations), this judicial activism that stamps deviancy as mainstream, seeking to create social engineered change in this nation, should end the speculation. The democrats are screaming, leftist, extremists societal engineers, and judges creating law via judicial fiat are their stealth tool to mutate this Republic to the left of a leftist liberal sty.

[ArGee]

There will be several people who will visit this thread to tell us it's none of government's business who has sex with whom.

There will be several who will tell us it is unreasonable to deny to some (gays) what others (straights) can have.

There will be several who will tell us that heterosexuals do all the same things that homosexuals do - it's only a difference of who they do it with.

And there will be several who will tell us it doesn't really matter whether people are born gay as long as they don't harm anyone else.

And when the documentation is supplied to show an agenda since the late 1980s to cause us to think in precisely these terms, those same people will laugh at the idea of a gay agenda.

We have been led like sheep. Now we get to find out whether we have been led to a shearing, or to a slaughter.

Shalom.

[international american]

You are so right! And Hollywood and much of tv is PROMOTING the Homo agenda with a vengeance!

[Roughneck]

>>>We have been led like sheep. Now we get to find out whether we have been led to a shearing, or to a slaughter<<<


Those of us who saw it coming didn't stand a chance did we? Now, we must make a stand.

Amen

[NYer]

And when the documentation is supplied to show an agenda since the late 1980s to cause us to think in precisely these terms, those same people will laugh at the idea of a gay agenda.

"We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of you shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all-male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us. Women, you cry for freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will instruct them; we will embrace them when they weep."

Homosexual Manifesto

[Kuksool]

If gays want the right to marry, then we should allow the Northeasten states to break away from the USA and join with Canada.

[freetradenotfree]

First woman approved as head of Massachusetts high court
BOSTON (AP) — Justice Margaret Marshall was elevated to chief justice of Massachusetts' highest court Wednesday, becoming the first woman to head the nation's oldest appellate court.

Ms. Marshall, a former chief counsel at Harvard University, overcame charges of anti-Catholic bias to win a 6-3 confirmation vote by the Governor's Council, which votes on nominations by the governor.

"1 follow in the footsteps of giants," Ms. Marshall said. "1 do so with humility, and with a deep commitment to the rule of law."

Ms. Marshall, 55, a native of South Africa,

was appointed an associate justice of the Supreme Judicial Court in 1996. She was at Harvard at the time and had previously been in private practice.

Her nomination to head the 307-year-old court was marred when Cardinal Bernard Law raised concerns that she harbored anti-Catholic bias.

Law, who heads the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston, wrote last month to Gov. Paul Cellucci and said Ms. Marshall was "open to serious charges of anti-Catholicism."

He cited an incident in which Ms. Marshall, while at Harvard, chastised a professor who had used university stationery for a personal note with an anti-abortion message.

Catholic groups also feared she could not be impartial on abortion cases because she once served on an abortion clinic's board of trustees. Ms. Marshall denied her personal views would affect her role as jurist.

Law later retracted his complaint after speaking with Ms. Marshall, who is Protestant. "She gave me her assurance that she was not anti-Catholic," he said, "and I have absolutely no reason to not accept her word on that."

Is Justice Margaret Marshall a U.S Citizens?

[NYer]

Is Justice Margaret Marshall a U.S Citizens?

Justice Margaret Marshall was elevated to chief justice of Massachusetts' highest court

I have checked several web sites ... no where was I able to find the answer to your excellent question.

Honorable Margaret H. Marshall is Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court. A native of South Africa, she graduated from Witwatersrand University in Johannesburg in 1966. In 1966, she was elected as President of the National Union of South African Students, and served in that capacity until 1968, when she came to the United States to pursue her graduate studies. She received a master's degree from Harvard University, and her J.D. from Yale Law School. Chief Justice Marshall was an associate, and later a partner, in the Boston law firm of Csaplar & Bok, and was a partner in the Boston law firm of Choate, Hall & Stewart. Before her appointment to the Supreme Judicial Court, she was Vice President and General Counsel of Harvard University. First appointed as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court in November, 1996, she was named as Chief Justice in September, 1999, by Governor Paul Cellucci, and began her term on October 14, 1999, following her confirmation by the Governor's Council. Chief Justice Marshall is the second woman to serve on the Supreme Judicial Court in its more than 300-year histo

[scripter]

And when the documentation is supplied to show an agenda since the late 1980s to cause us to think in precisely these terms, those same people will laugh at the idea of a gay agenda.

Speaking of the homosexual agenda, the following documents how they try to manipulate us into accepting their behavior:

• The Homosexual Propaganda and Media Manipulation Game 

And here's their platform from 1972, 1987, 1993 and 2000:

• Homosexual Agenda Platforms from 1972 - 2000 

Of course the documentation needs to list how homosexuals have targeted children:

• Targeting Children, Part 1: How the gay movement intends to capture the next generation 
• Targeting Children, Part 2: How the homosexual movement uses public schools as instruments of change 
• Targeting Children, Part 3: Activists encouraging experimentation 
• Targeting Children, Part 4: Access to children: homosexuality and molestation 

There's a lot more documentation available.

I'll be gone until Thursday so please don't think I'm ignoring your pings - hopefully EdReform has some time available to ping the list.

[Greybird]

There will be several people who will visit this thread to tell us it's none of government's business who has sex with whom.

That has been openly maintained for over a century and a half. Get a clue. (Lysander Spooner brought this up in the 1870s in "Vices Are Not Crimes.")

And when the documentation is supplied to show an agenda since the late 1980s to cause us to think in precisely these terms, those same people will laugh at the idea of a gay agenda.

To "cause us to think"? Utterly absurd, unless one endorses your view of humans being sheep, rather than the possessors of rational minds. With most discussions of media bias -- which is undeniable -- that, unfortunately, is the reigning assumption around here.

Beyond that, these issues have been brought up in vigorous public discussion for at least 35 years (albeit initially in academe), not 15 years. As with almost all conspiracy theories, the "gay agenda" line both proclaims the omnipotence to effect change of those actively involved, and suggests that such actions are transparent enough so as to not genuinely persuade anyone. Such contradictions, however, do not exist.

In any event, bibliographies are not arguments -- and those alleging an "agenda" are notorious for not putting their names on their own connected and logical cases for this. All we've had are any number of religious screeds that openly discard rational standards, in favor of (supposed) biblical and other proclamations.

That's not enough for genuine discourse ... but few want that, anyway, when simply averring that "homos threaten the culture" is so much easier.

[scripter]

Again I say, if you want arguments, gather your sources, making sure they weren't discredited within hours of their release and bring them to the discussion. At this point, your unwillingness to engage in a discussion using your own sources hints that you don't really have documentation to support your position.

Your attempts to brush off the facts merely because they're contained within links is typical of the pro-homosexual crowd - it's just misdirection. First take a link, read it, find a source that discredits anything in that link and post it. Until then, you're just pushing the homosexual agenda by trying to deny it's very real existence.

I won't be around for a couple of days but I'm sure somebody can easily refute anything you bring to the discussion. We've been doing this long enough to have seen every argument the pro-homosexual folks have, and we've been discrediting their aguments with facts for just as long.

Bring it on. If we're wrong we want to be corrected as it's the truth we're after. But something tells me you won't be responding with anything of substance, just like every other pro-homosexual freeper that posts and runs.

[ArGee]

Those of us who saw it coming didn't stand a chance did we?

Well, libertarians would claim the sheep are going there, but not us because we're all individuals. I agree with you, though, that we will all pay the price.

Now, we must make a stand.

On our knees as well as on our feet. And should G-d refuse to save America in this case, we will go down swinging.

Shalom.

[ArGee]

If gays want the right to marry, then we should allow the Northeasten states to break away from the USA and join with Canada.

Wouldn't it be cheaper and easier to pay the moving expenses of all gays to Canada?

Shalom.

[scripter]

A log more of the same here: Mass. Supreme Court Rules - Gay Couples have the Right to Marry.

There's probably going to be a lot of duplicate (or similar) original postings for a couple of days on this issue.

[ArGee]

I knew I could count on you for the documentation.

Stay well while you are gone. Know you will not be forgotten.

Shalom.

[ArGee]

To "cause us to think"? Utterly absurd, unless one endorses your view of humans being sheep, rather than the possessors of rational minds.

History supports my view more than yours. And when rational beings rationalize as much as you have done, we call it "denial."

You are a sheep, and you have been led. The fact that the concepts were articulated before the massive effort to influence our national thinking on the issue doesn't change this.

Shalom.

[scripter]

A log more

I don't know what it is, but the total number of my typos has greatly increased in these past few days. That should be

A lot more

I guess the t and g are close enough together... Sigh.

[scripter]

Thanks,. ArGee. BTW, the greatly expanded and updated database will be ready soon, making it a lot easier (I hope) for folks to access and read the information. It will be sorted by category and year, which will demonstrate the homosexual agenda over the years for all to see. Well, for those who aren't sheep for the homosexual agenda. My profile will always have a link to the latest information.