Log in

No account? Create an account
NY same-sex marriage bill defeated, life goes on - Greg [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]

[ website | gregstoll.com ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Links:| * Homepage * Mobile apps (Windows Phone, Win8, Android, webOS) * Pictures * LJBackup * Same-sex marriage map * iTunesAnalysis * Where's lunch? ]

NY same-sex marriage bill defeated, life goes on [Dec. 2nd, 2009|02:38 pm]
[Tags|, , ]
[Current Mood |optimisticoptimistic]

The New York same-sex marriage bill, which passed the state assembly 88-51, was defeated in the state senate 38-24, which isn't even close. (Anyone who knows anything about NY politics: why is the state senate so against it while the state assembly is so for it? It seems weird to me.)

Between this and the Maine defeat, as @fivethirtyeight tweeted: "But boy, its been a rough couple of months for progressives." Indeed.

Perhaps it's time to change our strategy - it seems like the votes just aren't there in most places for same-sex marriage. Looking at the same-sex marriage map (which I apologize for linking every time I write about this stuff, but it's a good way to see at a glance where we are, and can't a guy self-promote a bit?) same-sex marriage is legal in 4 states (and will be in 5 when New Hampshire's law takes effect in January) and civil unions are available in 5 more, plus DC. I think we should focus on picking off more states where there are no civil unions and trying to push civil unions there - they have fairly broad support, and from a practical perspective there's not much difference, especially since no same-sex marriages are being recognized at the federal level anyway. Maybe Maryland, or Illinois, or Rhode Island, or (heck) New York?

Getting actual rights for gay couples in other states is a lot more important to me than getting their unions called "marriage".

[User Picture]From: djedi
2009-12-03 04:24 pm (UTC)
Civil unions are a more possible, but more complicated strategy. Not only do we need state by state support but you still need federal support to pull it off.

It's like solving poverty in the US by distributing to poor people monopoly money. And then you have to go to each state and get them to say that at state agencies, poor people can use monopoly money like real money. Of course, most companies still wouldn't accept it and of course neither would the US gov't. The real success hinges on getting the US gov't to force recognition of monopoly money to be on teh same legal level as real money.

And even if you do that, and all companies and agencies are forced to recognize monopoly money to be the same as real money...how long do you think it will take to get rid of the social stigma on the poor people having to use fake money because they "can't afford real money"?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: gregstoll
2009-12-03 04:39 pm (UTC)
I agree, but I'm sufficiently pessimistic about repealing DOMA that I'm afraid it won't be an issue for a while.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)