patching...
Update: New! Tune in to WPIX11 at 5 p.m. to see Patch's Top Stories from the tri-state area.
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Local Reaction: Gay Marriage Bill Passes

A watershed day for New York as it becomes the most populous state to recognize gay marriage.

 

It came down to one late Friday night, the decision of one Hudson Valley senator and one nail-biter of a political drama, but New York is now the 6th state — and the union's largest — to perform same-sex marriages.

The following morning, local reaction around the town of Eastchester was almost unanimously positive, echoed by Bronxville resident Dave Ramsey.

“It’s fantastic,” said Ramsey. “It’s a long time coming and it’s a shame it had to go through such a torturous process. It's somewhat ironic that it was a Republican senator from Poughkeepsie that was the deciding vote, but I think it’s a very positive sign for New York State politics as a whole.”

“I was out last night in New York and I actually didn’t hear about it until I came home,” said Ellie Horowitz, also from Bronxville. “I was really thrilled. I have a lot of friends who will be very happy. I’ll probably be attending a wedding in the near future.”

Gary Porto, 59, and his partner Ruben Santiago, 54, who live together in Yorktown expressed their fervent support for the measure earlier on Friday. 

Allowing such unions can, and will, change people's attitudes toward gays and lesbians, Porto said. 

"It will show people that the world didn't fall apart," he said. "Love is love."

The bill passed the Assembly as expected, 82-47, and then around 10:30 p.m., the Senate voted in favor 32-29. Shouts of "USA! USA! USA!" erupted after the vote.

Sen. Stephen Saland, a Poughkeepsie Republican, had opposed the measure previously tipped the scale in favor of the measure Friday. Read his statement here.

Porto and Santiago have known each other for nearly three decades and for the last 19 years, the couple has shared a home in Yorktown. Porto said he wants the same things as any "normal" couple. 

"Just to have that recognition," he said. "It's so hard to put into words how important this is. It's really throwing us a bone because the federal government still doesn't recognize us. But it least will be one less block for people to use to discriminate against us."

Although they've had the chance to get married in other states, they decided that's not what they wanted. 

"I want the place I was born in and raised in to accept me," said the Bronx-born Porto. Santiago was born in Harlem.

New Rochelle resident Judith Pinals said the passage of the bill was about time.

"This was a justice issue," she said.

Her temple, Temple Israel of New Rochelle, has an LGBT committee. "Our temple is known to be welcoming and supportive of this issue," Pinals said.

New Rochelle resident and business man Scott Cohen said he was thrilled about the vote.

He was married in Connecticut to his husband.

"This means that people who want to be married in a same-sex relationship can do so in their home state," Cohen said.

He said having gay marriage OK'd in California and then taken away by Prop 8 was scary and he hopes the same thing doesn't happen in New York.

"I'm happy for now," Cohen said. "I don't know if it will be appealed. But I'm enjoying the current feeling."

Applying religious exemptions appeared central to passage. Religious institutions do not have to recognize same-sex marriages under the New York law.

Father Albert Azark  from Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church in White Plains explained his stance on the issue.

"We have no problem with gays," Azark said in advance of the vote. "We have gay couples in our church, but we can’t perform a wedding. It’s not our church, that’s how the tradition is. It’s the man and wife. We don’t reject people who come to church. I have a niece who’s gay, and the family went to some ceremony in Massachusetts.

"People get confused that because we can't perform the ceremony, but we don’t reject people here," he said. "You know we’re all sinners, the only one who judges us is going to be God.”

Pastor Matthew Curry of the United Methodist Church of Mount Kisco, in an interview Thursday, stated he personally supports allowing for same-sex marriage on a civil basis, and to allow for religious organizations to have the option to do so. However, he also supports having the discisions to perform marriages be at the discretion of the religious organizations.

The task of reversing the failed 2009 gay marriage vote in New York was significant, especially when polls showed New York voters remained divided over the issue — even within the same snapshot. A NY1/YNN-Marist Poll released last month found 53 percent of adult New Yorkers said marriage should only be between a man and a woman while at the same time 50 percent said same-sex couples should be allowed to marry in New York.

"We are all really ecstatic," said David Juhren, executive director of The LOFT LGBT Community Services Center for the Lower Hudson Valley and a Cortlandt Manor resident.

"A lot of people worked very hard in the last fews years since the Senate last voted," he said. "A lot of people worked to change the landscape and to make this night happen. We understand why they are in there (religious provisions.) They need to be there. We believe in a separation of church and state. No church should have to do something they don't want to do."

New Rochelle resident Linda Barat reached her 20-year-old gay son by cell phone at a celebration in front of the Stonewall bar in Manhattan after the vote was finalized.

"He held the phone up" so she could hear the cheers from the crowd.

"This is one of those moments where you can remember where you were when it happened," Barat said.

She was at a Pride Shabbat service at Temple Israel of New Rochelle while the vote was being taken.

"Everyone was cheering and hugging," Barat said.

She said people were checking their smartphones and crying out that the vote had been taken.

"What could be better to be with members of our community," when this happened, Barat said. "All I wanted was to talk to my son."

The issue crossed lines of sexuality, religion and politics to be sure, but also served to connect many, including gay activists of different generations.

James Stewart, the program director for the Westchester Jewish Center Services’ program the Center Lane LGBTQ Youth Community Center, which is based in both White Plains and Yonkers, was speaking to one of the kids about something serious at the Yonkers center Friday night.

Then he heard screaming coming out of the office. The marriage bill had passed.

“There was a lot of yelling and hugging and kissing," he said, struggling to find words. “It’s just hard to believe.”

Contributor Maddy Roth and Patch editors Dina Sciortino, Tom Auchterlonie and Plamena Pesheva contributed to this report. 

Melissa Ray

11:14 pm on Friday, June 24, 2011

Wonderful moment. I'm so proud to be a New Yorker.

Nick Oddo

11:35 pm on Friday, June 24, 2011

Kudos to Governor Cuomo! A man of his word!!!

Comment_arrow

Mike Hirsch

8:03 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Ditto that. How did Senator Greg Ball vote?

Gary Porto

11:39 pm on Friday, June 24, 2011

Truly a day to reflect upon and celebrate all those who have waited so long to be recognized as equals...thank you, New York!

Comment_arrow

joe

9:48 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

does this mean i can marry my brother for health benifits and tax returns ???

The Truth Hurts

11:45 pm on Friday, June 24, 2011

With all the problems facing New York State this is the priority in Albany! SICK

Comment_arrow

Deeply Concerned about people who are deeply concerned about ttown

11:50 pm on Friday, June 24, 2011

sick as in AWESOME! this is just as important as the economy, this is human rights

Comment_arrow

Jesse Caro

11:52 pm on Friday, June 24, 2011

Our state's government institutionally practiced blatant bigotry against millions of people, denying them the right to live their lives the way they wanted. If you think allowing love in the world to flourish where instead hate had kept millions from possessing their basic rights rights is "SICK," then you, and not the State Senate, are sick.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

2:56 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

@tth You seem to think this is the only matter they've addressed, which isn't the case. There have been numerous bills and votes, both before and after this one.

Comment_arrow

michelle

3:18 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Wow. It seems to me that your statement is rash and uninformed. The economy will see relief by this bill being passed! Do you not realize how much money we, the tax payers, GIVE to homosexuals because they were not treated equally? Do you not realize the fact that people will now spend money on parties, weddings, and divorces because they are now treated as humans? New York will be saving millions of dollars with this one, simple and fair bill.

J Philip Faranda

12:09 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

This is good on many levels. It will promote growth in a stagnant state, and it puts New York ahead of the curve for a change. The extension of liberty to all is an important, historic event. This makes us special again. This makes us the Empire State again.

Comment_arrow

The Truth Hurts

12:20 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

JPF, promote growth in a stagnant state??? Who are you trying to convince? Me or yourself.

The LOFT LGBT Community Center

2:04 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Westchester Marriage Equality Celebration
Saturday, June 25th at 1 pm
Steps of White Plains City Hall, on Main Street
We now have 1,324 reasons to celebrate !
(the # of rights that come with a NYS marriage license)
Sponsored by The LOFT: LGBT Community Services Center

The Rev. Jeffrey A. Geary

2:11 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Amen. Marriage equality an answer to many, many prayers. Thank you, God, for what you have been doing in NY. 0 The Rev. Jeff Geary, White Plains Presbyterian Church

dleighg

7:21 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

I am absolutely thrilled with this vote. Sorry Greg Ball couldn't be on the right side on this one, but happy it passed without him. And I promise, the sun will keep on rising and the sky will not fall!

Walt

7:26 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

It's just a matter of time before the ACLU challenges the religious institution exclusion from the GM law and litigates established religion out of existence. It's a great day indeed, enjoy.

Comment_arrow

dleighg

7:30 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

You conservatives seem to think the ACLU is always the bad guy. But actually the ACLU speaks on behalf of *all* constitutional freedoms, not only the "liberal" ones. Witness defending people who do very un-politically-correct things in the name of free speech. So in fact you are precisely 180 degrees wrong on this.

Comment_arrow

Walt

8:03 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

No idea what you are saying and realize I really don't care what anyones sexual preferences is but you can put it in the bank that the ACLU will go after ANY institution that uses the exemption to the GM law because it is not defensible. It is the same as having government sponsored "White Only" drinking fountains and the exemption will be successfully challenged in time. The Church will be labeled as a hate group and litigated into submission (or extinction) in much the same way that the Boy Scouts were when they attempted to exclude gay counselors.

Comment_arrow

Walt

10:34 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

My opinion is the challenge to the law will be because of the tax status of the church. Since it is excluding a certain segment of society, it should not be allowed to maintain the current status.
The reading material provided, for the most part, just showed cases where they defended individuals from freedom of religion infringements from established institutions like School Districts, Prison officials, etc, etc. The ACLU is not known to defend established institutions like the Church. If you look at their track record against teaching the theory of creationism in public school yet at the same time advocating and defending that "Reproductive Freedom" can be taught, you will see that they are no friend of religion.
Anyway, we'll see what the landscape looks like in 5 years, my opinion is that the Catholic Church's opposition to GM will be the first target because that's where the money but more importantly, that's where the publicity is.

Comment_arrow

John Sergent

1:18 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Walt: regardless of whether there's merit in such a challenge, I can't see it happening, much less being successful.... especially since they wrote the law so that if part of it is struck down, the whole thing goes.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

2:59 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Some religions already exclude a certain segment of society. Doesn't seem to have affected their tax status before, so why now?

Comment_arrow

George Datino

4:39 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Why not get rid of the religion exclusion from taxes? If there is indeed a seperation between church and state, then one has nothing to do with another. Everyone is free to practice whatever religion they choose or not, that is their choice. As long as the religion doesn't violate the law in its practice, people should be free to follow the practices of that religion. With that said, the rest of society shouldn't have to support that religion with its tax dollars. If a religion owns a building, then pay taxes on it like the rest of us. If a religion makes a profit, pay your fair share of taxes.

If a particular religion doesn't believe in same sex marriages and you want one, well guess what, you aren't that religion. Your choice would be to either try and work to get the religion to change or change to a religion that more closely follows your ideaology. Freedom of religion means you don't have to stay in one religion if you don't want to. If you stay, you have to abide by what that religion says. If most people of a religion leave because of that religion's rules, that religion won't be around too long.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

4:45 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Churches don't pay taxes because they fall under charitable and non-profit organizations. It's not a religious exclusion per se.

Some religions may not actually qualify, but that's dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

Chauncy Tillinghast

7:35 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Put it on the ballot. See what the people really want. You will never be able to legislate acceptance by passing a bill in the dead of night and giving gays special rights by signing it before the 10 days have passed.

Comment_arrow

sandpounder1

11:11 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

"Special rights" - ha ha ha - equality is NOT "special rights"

Comment_arrow

John Sergent

1:20 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

What is it about *this* issue that it should be voted on by the general public, breaking the principle of *representative* democracy on which our country is founded?

Chauncy Tillinghast

7:36 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Pure pandering to 3% of the population.

Comment_arrow

sandpounder1

11:15 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

More than half of the US population supports marriage equality, and the proportion is even higher in New York. That is not 3 percent of the population. Three percent of the population is more likely the adamantly bigoted homophobes who can't see the parallels between this development and other milestones in equality.

If you oppose same-sex marriage ... don't have one! Live and let live.

Comment_arrow

William Sarokin

12:10 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Pandering? 3% or .0000003%, civil rights is civil rights. We all deserve the same rights. Kudos to the Senators, especially the Republicans, who voted yes. Just sorry my State Senator, Greg Ball, didn't have the B--ls to do the same. And for all the fuss, you know what the effect this will have on the non gay population? Zero.

Ann Marie Hahr

7:45 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

This is an awesome moment in New York history - everyone should have equal rights!

Gary Ploski

7:57 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Congratuations to the people of NY and the United States of America!

"I cannot find a legal reason why same-sex couples should not be married" - Senator Grisanti supporting NY Marriage Equality

"I have come to believe that all New Yorkers should be entitled to the same 1324 rights that come with a civil marriage." - Statement By Senator Grisanti Regarding his “Yes” Vote

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

3:01 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

I was moved by Grisanti's statement. It's all too rare these days that a politician will risk his or her seat for a principled vote.

Murray Massover

8:17 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

It's about time. This is about Civil Rights and nothing more. No one is trying to change someone's beliefs. We live by the Constitution of the United States.

Patty Villanova

8:22 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Another red herring non-issue designed to distract from the real problems facing NY. Like the fact that despite this wonderful "civil rights" victory, New York is no longer a free state. For what it's worth, gays now have the right to marry. Good for them, I wonder if that will be enough to keep them from joining the mass exodus out of NYS. Our Legislature is controlled by the municipal unions who own the politicians of both parties, so I assume you can thank them for their support, otherwise this would never have happened. While this super important battle for gay rights was being fought, the same unions weasled their way out of pension and benefit reforms that could have saved the over-stressed taxpayers millions. Talk about screwed up priorities.

Marcel Hegglin

8:28 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

What a great way for governor Cuomo to make his way into the history books , congratulations

Wonderboy

9:40 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Funny, the topics that the liberal owned patch consider covering.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

3:04 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

This is important news in NY state. Why shouldn't they cover it?

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

3:43 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Fox News has become liberal! Another biased liberal story for the Patch to cover!

Comment_arrow

Deeply Concerned about people who are deeply concerned about ttown

4:09 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

then dont read the patch! this is not a liberal story this is a general story about state law

Lola K

10:19 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

And I'm still married! Phew. From all the rhetoric, I thought this would destroy my marriage, and I'd wake up divorced today.
Congratulations to all of the loving couples who will now be joined in wedded bliss (and all the good, bad and mundane that goes with it.) We'll toss a little rice in your honor today.

Charles Lederman

11:26 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Civil Rights? The Government has limited your freedom of speech; the corporations have dessimated the frre press; the DOJ has officially spat on your freedom from warrantless searches; the Government can seize your property without warrants and never give you a day in court to get it back; the new Quartering Acts have allowed the banks to take your homes (instead of the crown's troops and bureaucrats); your right to a defense is limited to impoverished defense attorneys who haven't had a raise in 10 years and earn 1/4 of what the judges and prosecutors get; your right to redress your grievances barely exists, and you will be punished for asserting your civil rights by paying the government's legal fees when you lose. But hooray for the minority population that just got recognized. You can now live and raise your families in a fascist police state just like the rest of us. Its not about Civil Rights . . . . its a way for the politicians to try and entrench themselves deeper into their positions of power. Wake up America!

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

3:07 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

I suspect the people who have just obtained equality would disagree with you.

Conservative NYer

11:31 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Is NY state now going introduce Polygamy to those who believe in having multiple wives? I personally do not have a problem with this as I have several cousins who are gay and have had partners for many, many years. What you do is your business, not mine. As a parent with two small children who we are raising in a very conservative manner I do mind and don't appreciate it when the LGBT agenda is pushed down the throats of parents who see differently (especially through the public school system that I pay into). I am sure the next agenda is to introduce "Tango Make Three" to NY Kindergardners. Tolerance goes both ways folks. Seems like those who force it upon us cannot tolerate those of us who have opposing views. God Bless!

Comment_arrow

Bjorn Olsson

11:53 am on Saturday, June 25, 2011

There are very few political changes that are done by 100% majority, there is always a "losing" side on pretty much every democratic vote. That doesn't mean that anything is "forced upon" anyone, you just can't have everything exactly the way you want it. You'll still raise your kids the way you want to, in time they will form their opinion anyway.

Comment_arrow

Deeply Concerned about people who are deeply concerned about ttown

3:42 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

i cant tolerate people who dont think gay marriage is right, i hope ur kids get a good dose of the LGBT agenda cuz their parents aren't gonna teach equality for all

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

4:01 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

@Deeply, I hope you don't mean that. People have a right to individual beliefs and if someone feels that gay marriage is wrong or abortion is wrong, that's their right. What they don't have the right to do is to impose their beliefs on everyone else. If you expect people to be tolerant of your beliefs, you should respect theirs

NAO

1:29 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

I think this was a good thing. People do not remember that a little over 40 years ago it was illegal for an interracial couple to marry. Now it is commonplace for mixed race couples to get married and no one thinks anything of it. In another 40 years people will think nothing of a gay or lesbian couple. Time changes and we need to change with it.

Naomi

Bruce Cohen

1:52 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

As a straight man with numerous Gay and Lesbian friends, All I can say is "Its about time".

I'm sick and tired of carious churches (and you know who I'm talking about), trying to force their beliefs on those of us who really don't agree with them.

While everyone has the right to think and believe what they feel is best for them, I, for one, don't want those beliefs shoved down my throat, or made to feel that I'm wrong for not falling into line with their agendas.

Now if we can get those of you who feel that abortion is wrong to either shut up or go away, life would be much more pleasant.

Comment_arrow

Chauncy Tillinghast

12:48 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Brucie, why are you so intolerant? Attacking the Catholic church because you are Jewish is probably not what the Rabbi taught you.

RealityCheck

4:47 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Marriage Equality for same sex individuals is a misnomer. The term Marriage Equality is an oxymoron, in that the term alone can never symbolize genuine equality of marriage, because “natural” marriage (natural union) is absolute and perfect under Natural Law. Barring any religious connotation, a natural relationship is “innate” to the human subconscious mind and leads to procreation with another from the opposite sex, thus supporting a viable and natural “evolution” of mankind. Anything less, is still and always will be, and must be a legislated civil union; which is ok! A civil union is a term devised and implemented at the hands of man to get around what man cannot change on this earth, what is absolute and perfect, which are the basic tenants of universal Natural Laws.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

5:03 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Under your logic, straight couples who don't want to have children shouldn't marry.

At any rate, marriage in this case is a legal construct, not a religious one, so your point is irrelevant to this discussion. Couples who are married have more rights than couples who aren't.

Comment_arrow

Bjorn Olsson

7:21 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

I can't think of any such Natural Law that defines the word "Marriage". If it is just the word we argue about, isn't that a whole lot of noise about nothing?

RealityCheck

4:48 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Marriage equality for same sex individuals is theoretically possible for the autocrats in Albany, and their special interest constituents, but divinely and pragmatically impossible for most, because offspring cannot naturally result from such a union. It’s very simple; marriage is natural union of two persons defined by “a” higher power. And whether you or I like it or not, only that power has the right to define a natural declaration of marriage as between a man and a woman; the only “union” that can produce offspring and sustain humanity. Anything less is and can “only” be considered a legislated civil union; one legislated at the hands of man. Albany cannot defy “natural law” through legislation. Who do you think you are? Who do you think we are? Our freedoms are god given and can easily be lost at the hands of autocrats and big out of control government. Marriage Equality Act in New York State is at best insincere because it’s still just, and can only a civil union.

J Philip Faranda

4:54 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Just wondering if people would post the same vitriol if they didn't hide behind anonymous scree names.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

5:05 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

No kidding. All that religious stuff has no bearing on the law that was passed and is under discussion (and I use that word loosely) here.

Comment_arrow
Patch_comments_icon

Renea Henry

6:35 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Agreed Mr. Faranda. If anyone thinks a fake name is free reign to make hateful remarks or violate the terms of service, think again. I just removed a a personal insult and if it happens again, that person will not be back.

Conservative NYer

6:27 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

@ Deeply Concerned: Don't know if your comment was directed at me: "i can’t tolerate people who don’t think gay marriage is right, i hope ur kids get a good dose of the LGBT agenda cuz their parents aren't gonna teach equality for all".

But if it was: My kids will learn about LGBT when I FEEL AS A PARENT they are able to understand it emotionally and process it, not some public school teacher or politician who has no idea what our values are as a family. Oh and BTW my children DO NOT attend public school but catholic school so you can forget about them learning about the LGBT agenda. I, as a parent will choose WHEN I will teach MY CHILDREN about being a gay, transexual, etc. because it is a fact of life but I will do so on my watch not someone else’s who does not care about the emotional welfare of MY CHILDREN.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

6:43 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

I am for gay marriage. I also agree with you for the most part. They are your children and your responsibility. I hope that you don't teach them to hate or to be intolerant, because there's too much of both in the world.

Comment_arrow

Bjorn Olsson

7:22 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Sounds like you might be better off with home schooling if you wish to make sure that noone teaches or discusses topics you wish to save for later.

Comment_arrow

Deeply Concerned about people who are deeply concerned about ttown

7:44 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

im saying that they will be taught wrong about LGBT if you teach them, they will struggle in the more tolerant and better America we live in

rick paul

6:57 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Apparently there was no 'other' side of this issue. Not very fair reporting.

Earl

7:28 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Great, the State is going bankrupt and people are fleeing in droves, but gays can get married now!!!!!!!!!!!! Priorities!

Nick Oddo

7:44 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

In the best selling book The Four Agreements don Miguel Ruiz gives four principles to practice in order to create love and happiness in your life. Anger and hate become disease. There are many things during life that we don't agree with but is continuing to hate and be angry worth your quality of life?
Let it go and focus on all the things you love about life.

The Four Agreements are:

1. Be Impeccable with your Word: Speak with integrity. Say only what you mean. Avoid using the Word to speak against yourself or to gossip about others. Use the power of your Word in the direction of truth and love.

2. Don’t Take Anything Personally
Nothing others do is because of you. What others say and do is a projection of their own reality, their own dream. When you are immune to the opinions and actions of others, you won’t be the victim of needless suffering.

3. Don’t Make Assumptions
Find the courage to ask questions and to express what you really want. Communicate with others as clearly as you can to avoid misunderstandings, sadness and drama. With just this one agreement, you can completely transform your life.

4. Always Do Your Best
Your best is going to change from moment to moment; it will be different when you are healthy as opposed to sick. Under any circumstance, simply do your best, and you will avoid self-judgment, self-abuse, and regret.

Brian O

7:50 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Cuomo should have went to bed and told his Aides, I will find out the outcome in the morning and then sign it without all the hoopla. It may be a long time before he should be able to receive Communion. If you are a Catholic , you are suppose to be one all the time . Can you say ABOMINATION. It is what it is, sorry folks. We all will meet are maker one day and he will not buy the excuse of' saying " personally I am against it but as an elected official I did what the people { sinners } wanted." By the way I don't live in a glass house.

Comment_arrow

Eddie Izzard

2:29 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

I am always saddened any day a member of religious community is so judgement as to try to fill the role of God. He as our FORGIVING creator would never pass judgement so harshly on His own creations as to condem them to damnation for acting on as pure and selfless an emotion as love, and if he dose then wouldn't none of us be safe. For to be human we all have acted much worse on much darker emotions of greed and hate, such as you chose to now, and for your view of a God that regeats His children for acting purly and living a life pain and inequality for these pure reasons that SOCIETY does not accept, well I'm sorry because you are going to be very lonely in you idea of Heaven.

Patch_comments_icon

Laura Spear

8:17 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Finally! This is truly fantastic news--better late than never. Another major step forward in basic human rights, hopefully now even more states will follow suit.

Conservative NYer

8:23 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

@Bjorn: Sounds like you might be better off with home schooling if you wish to make sure that noone teaches or discusses topics you wish to save for later.

Obviously you know nothing about a Catholic Education.

@ Deeply Concerned: And why do you think I would not teach them tolerance? You assume way too much. Just because I don't agree with gay marriage does not mean I will not tolerate it or teach my children about tolerance, respect and love. What people do in their bedroom is none of my business and whom they choose to love is none of my business either. But teaching my children IS MY BUSINESS and I will teach my children how I see fit and when they are old enough. As they mature emotionally the can determine and formulate an opinion on their own what their values will be.

Comment_arrow

Chauncy Tillinghast

8:41 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Then don't put them into the public school system where the gay agenda is shoved down their throats. The tide is changing as the incompetent Obama will be voted out as will many in then Senat. Then we can work on a Constitutional Amendment declaring marriage as being between one man and one woman.

Chauncy Tillinghast

8:32 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

This rag is just an extension of the Huffington Post or worse with these biased reporters who are getting fired from the Journal News and other liberal rag sheets getting new found power and censoring remarks that do not fit into their liberal agenda.

Earl

9:17 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

The people who drafted the Constitution of this great country were religious men- they wanted freedom of religion, but made sure the State did not have it's own sponsored one.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

9:26 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Some of them were religious, some of them weren't. Some of them weren't even Christians.

RealityCheck

9:19 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

I don’t know what your problem is with Christianity. No of my postings were specifically relative to any one particular religion. Why are you constantly angry about Christianity? Where is your tolerance? What is your take on natural law in relation to marriage equality? Not a problem for you?

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

9:29 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

I don't have a clue what you mean by "natural law" and I suspect no one else does either.

Deeply Concerned about people who are deeply concerned about ttown

9:29 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Im having fun, there is no argument against gay marriage, saying it is not right for some feeling inside you or something isnt a reason to not have marriage equality. even if you believe that so deeply that you will fight for it tooth and nail its still not right. anything you post that is against this is wrong so you will just look dumb if you try to prove me wrong.

Earl

10:40 pm on Saturday, June 25, 2011

Well, no sense in arguing it anymore-it is done- and society will be so much better for it- the economy will improve, people will get back to work, quality of life will improve for all, the the debt this sick generation is dumping onto our kids and grandkids will just go away, and the terrorists will no longer hate us. All is right with the world.

Comment_arrow

John Sergent

1:31 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Of course it won't fix everything. But it's one less thing wrong, at least in New York.

rick paul

8:49 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

One sided reporting. This is not journalism. It is an edited opinion blog. A mini version of the Huffing AOL mess. It's enough to make me stop reading. Or maybe just read comics which contain more accurate and balanced opinions. At least Superman admits he is no longer an American.

Comment_arrow

Chauncy Tillinghast

9:30 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Rick, they just delete comments with their new found power. A bunch of giggling neophytes who just want To desparately fit in somewhere. Count the number of times the word "tolerant" (meaning them) and bigot (meaning everyone who disagrees with them) are used. This is a lopsided blog, you are correct, trying to masquerade as a newspaper.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

9:36 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

They've always had the power to delete comments. This subject is obviously a heated one and so there have been more comments that have violated the ToS than usual. Chauncy is lucky that all of his comments haven't been deleted, given that he's not using his real name.

No one is making either of you read the Patch, you know. If it's so offensive to you, stop reading it. It's not that hard to do.

Comment_arrow

Bjorn Olsson

9:40 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Chauncy,
I bet of you would stick to arguments rather than ad hominem attacks you would not get your comments removed. If you can't make your case without calling other people "giggling neophytes", "insecure weirdos", "flaming liberal" to just name a few things that did NOT get deleted, I would suggest holding off on posting.

Comment_arrow

Chauncy Tillinghast

12:24 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Your comments are selective and disingenuous since you not once chastised those gay bloggers who continually called other bloggers hateful and bigots.

tom murphy

8:51 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

I wish gay folks who want to marry all the luck in the world. Gays achieving their full civil rights in no way diminishes my civil rights. What scares me is all the folks who are proclaiming to know what the will of the Almighty is. Maybe all God wants is for us to be kind and tolerant of each other. Of course not having a direct line to the higher power I am only guessing.

Comment_arrow

Chauncy Tillinghast

9:03 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Yes Tom you are only guessing. Fortunate for the USA we did not make all our laws based on guesses of the uninformed.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

9:20 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Fortunately for the USA, we (usually) don't make our laws based on religion or prejudice either.

Are you suggesting that you do have a direct line to the higher power? That was the only thing that Tom was "guessing" about.

Comment_arrow

Chauncy Tillinghast

12:21 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

we just made a law based on sexual preference. Before this stupid law was passed, ALL people had the exact same rights under the Constitution and the laws of NYS. Heterosexual men could not marry a man and neither could someone whi calls himself gay marry another man. Exact same rights.

Patty Villanova

9:14 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

While everyone had their pants in a twist celebrating the gay marriage BS, the crooks in the Legislature used the brouhaha to sneak in one of the most costly zingers ever conceived of by the vile thugs who run the teachers union. The law, passed in the dead of night, while these idiots are patting themselves on the back, will allow the crooks on our school boards to get around the property tax cap by allowing them to BOND the extra money it will cost to fund the teachers' lavish pensions. This is pure back door borrowing- the voters will have no say, there will be NO vote on this. So imagine how this is going to play out: no cuts in pensions and we will paying for them over the course of decades. Or our children and grandchildren will. So please excuse me if I don't get all excited because gays can now get married. Who cares? Will they even be able to afford to live in NYS after they tie the knot?

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

9:27 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

So you would prefer that the your town cuts services? The pensions — which are for all civil servants, not just teachers — are a legal obligation and have to be paid for one way or the other.

Not that this has anything to do with gay marriage, of course.

Ross Revira

9:58 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Let see if this gets removed:
If this is about people exercising their constitutional rights than I ask this question. Would the next logical step be allowing a brother and sister to marry? Excluding the potential medical risks of their offspring what is the difference? Don't they have a civil right to marry the person of their choice?
That said I have no religious or personal reasons to deny gays happiness. Good luck enjoy the rest of your life.

Comment_arrow

John Tirella

10:47 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Great point Ross! Maybe "Banjo" lessons should be required by all applicants for a "Marriage License". Since the sodomy laws in NY State have been declared in NY State unconstitutional, no residency requirement for the license and no blood test, seems to be a money maker for both the gov't entities and tourist industry! Don't ask-Don't tell> just give me the dough! $40 to $50 a pop plus staying in a hotel/motel, food, etc is also taxed. Windfall for the state, you bet and didn't have to do a thing for it.

Comment_arrow

John Sergent

1:29 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

"What's the difference," you ask. If you cannot tell the difference between your sibling and someone you're not closely related to, then I'm glad not to be a relative of yours :) Serious answer: marriage is about creating a kin relationship between mates. You already *have* a kinship with your siblings, which takes precedence.

But if it's such a big deal to you.... well, so few people would ever *want* to do that then I say go ahead and let them. After all, already more states let you marry a first cousin than someone of the same sex.

Deeply Concerned about people who are deeply concerned about ttown

10:09 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

patch is more like a blog then a news source, it allows u to post comments doesnt it, lay off the journalists, just keep trying to convince people how bad gay marriage is and stop ripping on the reporting

Ross Revira

10:19 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Heron since when is a law determined by the amount of people wanting their civil rights. Gays only represent 3%-10% of the population. The US Constitution protects the minority from the majority. The vast majority of people in the US do not find homosexual sex appealing but is this a reason to make it illegal? What is good for the goose is good for the gander. This law has many unintended consequences.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

10:31 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Indeed. The Constitution says that "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

There was a time when there it was illegal for blacks and whites to marry. It was found unconstitutional Many of the arguments made above could have been said about miscegenation back then.

Comment_arrow

Chauncy Tillinghast

12:31 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Hey Bjorn, Deanna just called the previous blogger ( whose post was mysteriously deleted) a bad name, how vome you are not calling her out for banishment. BTW please use your real name from now on. The first two letters are a dead giveaway.

Ross Revira

10:36 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

So Meredith you would have to agree that siblings should be allowed to marry?

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

11:55 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

No, I don't have to agree with that, since it does not logically follow.

Deanna Gould

10:38 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Have a nice day, Glenn! No time for stupidity.

Theresa Kump Leghorn

11:51 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

This whole discussion thread supports my contention that Patch should require commenters to use their real names. The people who hide behind fake screen names feel empowered to say all kinds of crazy, hateful things because they are cowards: If they used their real names they would think twice before hitting the "send" key.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

11:59 am on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Actually, commenters have to use their real names according to the ToS. I've already written to the parent company suggesting that it be enforced. Hopefully you missed the 5 or so posts from one of my two cyberstalkers. The comment moderator on duty removed them very quickly, but he shouldn't have been allowed to post in the first place without using his real name.

Comment_arrow

Chauncy Tillinghast

12:15 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Mesoderm, just because you are unable to see me on Facebook does not mean I am not using my given name. If I was using Hussein Magimba you would not dare to question my identity.And if anyone else questioned it he would be called a racist and a bigot. Your intolerance for people who are different than you because their names appear "funny" to you is deplorable, bordering in bigotry. you should learn to embrace the diversity of names of citizens of the USA, even if they belong to the 97% in the heterosexual class of people.

Comment_arrow

John Sergent

1:23 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

The only thing such a rule *does* is to encourage/enable cyberstalkers. People are pretty much as rude under their own names as under false ones, and there is nothing stopping someone from choosing a real-looking name that isn't theirs. Meanwhile those of us who try to follow the rules are left vulnerable to any loose nut who takes offense over nothing. I understand they mean well, but it's still at best a silly requirement.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

4:33 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

John, I doubt nearly as many people would be as rude, at least if they stopped to think for a moment. (I know, an unreasonable assumption about many.) After all, it wouldn't look very good when your next employer googles your name and sees what comes up.

Earl

12:21 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Actually Merideth, if there is no money left to fund those "legal obligations " you call pensions, then what, we just raise taxes 100% or more a year to cover them? I don't think so- either mass layoffs will happen to compensate or the unions will use their heads and come to a fair agreement like they did in Jersey with Gov Christie- or they'll just be forced. One way or the other, the money just aint there.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

4:31 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

In Hastings-on-Hudson, property taxes went up 4.5%, which included coverage of pensions. I rather doubt that wherever you live would require raising taxes 100%. But why use facts when you can use hyperbole?

Patch_comments_icon

Katie Ryan O'Connor

12:30 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Hi Theresa,
You bring up something we talk about and work on all the time at Patch. When it comes to our commenting function, we always strive to do better and make improvements all the time, some visible and some behind-the-scenes.
Right now we aren't "checking IDs" at the door, so to speak, but we absolutely enforce our terms of use and can/will/do delete comments and suspend user accounts (including by IP address) for persistent offenders. Deciding what comments stay or go is sometimes the easiest thing I do all day, other times extremely difficult — a true judgment call. As a journalist, I'm always wary of solving issues of free speech with less speech — I don't think that's the answer — but we can't allow this space to be hostile either.
Luckily, the vast majority of our readers are honest, sincere people who wish to have their say on issues of the day in a civil fashion and we are sensitive to not make that process overly burdensome.
A few things everyone should know: Always feel free to report those unwilling to play by the rules (personal attacks, off-topic rants, hate speech) immediately to me at kathleen@patch.com and also familiarize yourself with our "flag" button. That's a method of self-policing that some might find useful.

Comment_arrow

Meredith Lesly

4:46 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Your terms of service require people to use their own name. I understand you want to promote a free-flowing exchange of ideas, but if someone doesn't have the courage to post an opinion under their own name, they shouldn't post it. Given that I had a cyberstalker post 5 nasty-grams last night, all under separate names, I admit some of my reaction is personal, but some of the comments made last night had led me to look up your ToS before that.

If you want to allow people to post things anonymously, at the very least they should have to be approved by a moderator before appearing in public rather than having them visible until they're removed.

JJ

1:03 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

It's about time New York! Finally!

Mitch Horn

1:07 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Would someone please explain to the right that being hateful and name calling completely undermines their argument for the the "Moral" high road?"Judge not lest ye be judged" "do unto others...." "What you do to the least of these..."As a gay Christian, and no that is not an Oxymoron, My relationship with my maker and my appointment with him at the end of my journey on this plain is none of any of your concerns. I was made in the image of my God, and"I am Beautifully and wonderfully made." My God has love enough for all of us, and rejoices that I can love and be loved. It has just been the insecurities and prejudices of Man that has taken so long to catch up. This legislation is the end of a bitter, cruel era, and I rejoice that gay folks from this point onward do not have to see themselves as automatically being "Outside" the law. and when their parents, peers, strangers, bully and abuse them for who they are, they now have legal validation that they too can one day be a part of the "American Dream" and pursue Life, Liberty freedom and Happiness... regardless.

Reality

1:08 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Yes, lets get back on Topic. NYS is once again a leader in Civil Rights. Marriage Equality is right and and affords a lot of loving couples the rights and priviledges so many of us always enjoyed and took for granted. It also restores family values as two loving adults can now take their vows and children can proudly say that there parents are married and not just friends, partners, etc. This will strengthen the sanctury of Marriage and will be a positive step for society. Congratulations to all who have waited so long and for those who will take advantage of this law may your Wedding Day be beautiful and may your Marriage be fill of love & happiness.

Nurse Ratched

4:17 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Congratulations to those who have same sex partners and will be able to marry. A word of advice from someone who has been married for 17 years. The grass is always greener! A marriage can at times be like a job. But with the right person, regardless of sexual orientation, can be a wonderful union of souls. Good luck to ALL those who plan to marry in the near future. Buckle in!!!!!! AND NO....THIS IS NOT MY REAL NAME.....DOES IT DETRACT FROM THE CONTENT OF MY STATEMENT!!!!!! I THINK NOT

Patch_comments_icon

Katie Ryan O'Connor

6:09 pm on Sunday, June 26, 2011

Hi all,
Because the discussion is now settling into a back and forth between just a handful of people I'm closing comments for now. Please feel free to continue the conversation on the story at hand on our Facebook pages, which can be found by searching for the name of your Patch in Facebook. Have a wonderful end to your weekend.

The editor has closed comments for this article.