NOM BLOG

Urgent Marriage Alert: NY to Vote on Same-Sex Marriage Bill

 

The New York State Legislature is expected to vote on a same–sex marriage bill soon. Please take action today urging your Senator and Assemblyman to stand for marriage.

Urge Your Senator & Assemblyman to Support Marriage Today!

Today the legislature begins a 2–week vacation, returning to Albany on May 2nd. Reports out of Albany are indicating that the legislature will vote on same–sex marriage shortly after they return.

That gives us two weeks to contact legislators in defense of marriage! Please join us today by sending an email to your state senator and assemblyman.

Two years ago, your phone calls and emails helped block same–sex marriage in New York, as even the New York Times acknowledged that key legislators voting against the same–sex marriage bill did so because of “overwhelming opposition to same–sex marriage among their constituents.” The same thing happened in New Jersey, and earlier this year, in Maryland and Rhode Island.

The message is clear. When the people stand up, same–sex marriage advocates have to back down. Despite carefully crafted PR campaigns, gay marriage advocates simply cannot muster the votes when legislators start hearing from their constituents.

We can do it again, but only if you do two things today:

  1. Click here to send an email to your state senator and assemblyman today. Or click here to look up their phone number. Never underestimate the power of your phone calls or emails, especially over these next two weeks while they are at home in their districts.
  2. Forward this message to at least 5 friends today. Or share this email via Facebook and Twitter. We need thousands of New Yorkers contacting their legislators over these next two weeks. Please help get the word out!

Together we can send a powerful message to our elected officials. Please join us today!

19 Comments

  1. Sean
    Posted April 13, 2011 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

    It's important to note that only religionists, not all people, oppose equal treatment for gays and lesbians.

  2. Mike P.
    Posted April 13, 2011 at 9:08 pm | Permalink

    Sean- 'Religionists' have accounted for nearly everyone in this country throughout its history...so your point is meaningless.

  3. Mike Brooks
    Posted April 13, 2011 at 11:42 pm | Permalink

    My position on SSM is not based on religion. It's based on marriage and family as the foundation of a stable society where parents take responsibility for their children, children have a mom and a dad, and the government does not need to step in and take care of an overwhelming number of single mothers and children in poverty.

    SSM severs the link between marriage and procreation, thus destroying the essence of marriage.

    Oh, and I think that homosexual relationships do not provide value to society like heterosexual relationships do: only opposite sex unions can perpetuate our society. Homosexuality is a dead end lifestyle.

  4. Posted April 14, 2011 at 3:58 am | Permalink

    Good folks in New York we need you to reach out to the churches and have them and their members email & call the lawmakers.

  5. Don
    Posted April 14, 2011 at 5:32 am | Permalink

    Sean:

    Heck no. Religionists support 100% equal treatment for homosexuals. You can marry someone of the opposite sex just like we can! EXACTLY equal!

  6. Zak Jones
    Posted April 14, 2011 at 8:52 am | Permalink

    Don,

    You know I CAN'T marry a woman. That would be a dead end lifestyle for me.

  7. Marty
    Posted April 14, 2011 at 11:38 am | Permalink

    That's your choice Zak, nobody's forcing you one way or another. What you CAN'T do is marry a man and insist that it's equal.

    Because as we all know, separate isn't equal. Your bias against women is your own personal issue.

  8. Marty
    Posted April 14, 2011 at 11:39 am | Permalink

    Heh, I know a lot of married men who can tell you a thing or two about "dead end lifestyles" so feel free to join the club ;)

  9. John Noe
    Posted April 14, 2011 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    Sean what if some of us like me told you that we were against it because it is a civil rights and constitutional issue.
    (1) The Constitution guarentees equality of people under the law, not human conduct and behavior. It does not apply to human conduct. If it did we would have total anarchy.

    (2) The Constitution does not grant equality of results. This is why their is unequal earned income in society. I have the same right to play golf like Tiger Woods. I do not have the same right to his results. Has anyone ever noticed that married people get benefits that single people do not. Thus singles and married people are not treated equally. As usual the homosexuals ignore this point.

    (3) Their is the concept of equality. Homosexuals are simply not equal. Science and biology says so. You cannot reproduce. You have a higher mortality rate and higher chance of sickness and disease.

    (4) Finally their is the question of how we interpret equality. Homosexuals demand an interpretation of equality that does not apply to anyone else. The already have equal rights. Just obey the laws equally like all other Americans. Making up your own laws and demanding that they be followed is not equality but you getting special treatment.

  10. Posted April 14, 2011 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

    Mike Brooks:

    SSM severs the link between marriage and procreation

    Marriage has never been required for procreation, and procreation is not required for marriage. So this is a red herring.

    Now, if you personally don't want to have children until you're married, that's fine. Nobody's stopping you.

  11. TC Matthews
    Posted April 14, 2011 at 2:01 pm | Permalink

    It's not an issue of requirement. It's an issue of encouragement. Marriage encourages responsible procreation.

  12. Don
    Posted April 14, 2011 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

    Zak:

    I understand that marrying a woman would be, from your point of view, a "dead end" lifestyle for you. However, it is not the subjective quality of your lifestyle which is at issue here, Zak.

  13. SC Guy
    Posted April 14, 2011 at 6:36 pm | Permalink

    Does anyone have a current tally of the votes for or against this in the state senate? It's hard for me to imagine this passing in a GOP-controlled state senate - even in New York.

  14. Zak Jones
    Posted April 15, 2011 at 12:52 am | Permalink

    What IS the issue then, Don?? Control? Absolute power? Fear & Loathing?
    Why do you care so much who I choose to spend my life with as a partner?

  15. Don
    Posted April 15, 2011 at 2:58 am | Permalink

    Zak:

    Gee, why didn't you give me a loaded set of choices, LOL! ;-)

    I don't care at all who you choose to spend your life with as a partner other than to hope that you choose wisely and are happy. I do care about preserving the definition of marriage.

    Let me turn the tables on you, Zak. Why do you want to thwart the lawfully expressed will of the people as expressed in California and Maine, for example? Why don't you want to let your fellow Americans vote on marriage? Control? Absolute power? Fear and loathing?

  16. Zak Jones
    Posted April 15, 2011 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

    It all has to do with enlightenment. Most of Americans are not enlightened as to the ways of the real world. They think the entire world works the way they have always known it to work. This is due to the fact that they don't get out much. Too many people live their entire lives in the same town they were born in. They don't know that some people wear dungarees and sneakers, while they only wear blue jeans and tennis shoes. It's the same thing, just a different way of saying it.

    Some Americans are afraid of the unknown. They prefer to stick with what they know and won't experiment with anything new. If you always drink Budweiser, you may be afraid to try Samuel Adams. I prefer to try new things all the time and learn how the rest of the world works. I like to open my mind and explore a lot of "what if's".

    The human mind is like a parachute. It works much better if it is opened.

  17. Don
    Posted April 15, 2011 at 11:45 pm | Permalink

    Zak:

    I urge you to read again what you wrote in the above post. Is that REALLY where you are coming from?

    Zak, supposed you were far and away the most intelligent man on the planet. Would you then view everyone else as stupid?

    None of us have it all, meaning that none of us is God. We would be very much impoverished if all of the people who lived in the same town their entire life drinking only the beer their parents drank were to suddenly vanish.

    God made both the rose and the dandelion. Which is better? Which could we do without?

    You don't have to be a star to be in God's show. ;-)

  18. Zak Jones
    Posted April 18, 2011 at 8:49 am | Permalink

    "God made both the rose and the dandelion. Which is better? Which could we do without?"

    There is no "BETTER". That is the point I was trying to make. What is "right" for you may be different than what is "right" for someone else.

  19. Don
    Posted April 19, 2011 at 4:23 am | Permalink

    Zak:

    When it comes to law, there isn't a "right for you", "right for me". There's simply the law which is the same for every citizen.

One Trackback

  1. [...] Vanasco, editor in chief, 365gay.com 04.14.2011 4:00pm EDTThe National Organization for Marriage sent out an alert that after the New York State legislature’s two-week break, they would be voting on gay [...]