In yet another crushing defeat for the pro-homosexual movement, the New York State Senate decisively rejected by a 38-to-24 margin a bill that would have forced same-sex “marriage” upon New Yorkers. The issue is essentially dead until the next legislative session in 2011.
TFP volunteers campaign for Traditional Marriage in New York
The December 2 decision underscores a groundswell of public reaction to the unpopular initiative. The pro-family movement has had an unbroken string of 31 major victories. In no state where the issue has been put to a popular vote has it succeeded.
It also underscores the movement’s disregard for democratic principles since it has chosen to bypass such expressions of the popular will and concentrate on state legislatures to railroad laws legalizing such “marriages.” With the repeal of such efforts by popular referenda in California and Maine, even this tactic is not succeeding.
It had been hoped that that at least heavily Democratic New York would break the trend and provide momentum for a movement whose major issue is stalled.
Indeed, the movement pulled out all the stops for an elusive New York prize. Homosexual rights organizations poured nearly $1 million on New York legislative races electing a Democratic majority which had same sex “marriage” high on the agenda.
Gov. David A. Patterson banked what little political capital remains to him by calling a special legislative session which was intent upon passing the “marriage” bill. The bill was pushed into the Senate where observers note that rarely do bills reach the full Senate floor unless passage is more or less certain.
Despite all these efforts, traditional marriage won again. The 38-to-24 victory startled even proponents of the bills as they saw eight Democrats voted against the measure. Proponents were hoping for 35 votes and were left in disarray. Politically vulnerable Democrats jumped ship and joined the pro-family majority. Especially outspoken on the issue was Sen. Ruben Diaz, Sr. (D-NY 32), who led a principled stand on the issue.
Such a humiliating defeat should lead pro-homosexual leaders to reconsider their position. However, it has only hardened them in the efforts to force same-sex “marriage” upon the population. They will continue to use the same worn-out arguments wrongly comparing same-sex “marriage” to interracial marriage. They will continue to look for new ways sidestep the system and impose this measure upon the American people.
Above all, they hope to wear down public resistance to same-sex “marriage” over time by proposing less radical steps such as civil unions. Meanwhile, observers note that more radical elements are showing their true colors by moving too fast in the field insisting upon “marriage” as the only acceptable alternative in face of an electorate that resents being pushed too quickly.