Watch This Short Video on America's Form of Government

More on How Gay "Marriage" Happened in New York state

Here is another article, [at 4/25/13 this article isn't available but the quotes below are accurate;  here is a link to a similar account] also from New Yorker's Family Research Foundation, that gives more explanation about how the same-sex "marriage" vote in New York was basically bought and sold and passed under questionable (illegal?) conditions.  Republicans were instrumental in passing this bill.  The author mentions the groundwork that was laid by Republican donors in collusion (shall we say) with Andrew Cuomo. 

The battle really began back some months ago when Steve Cohen and other top staff members from Governor Andrew Cuomo’s administration met with wealthy Republican financial contributors in New York City. The governor’s staff proposed that they should work with the governor to see that homosexual “marriage” legislation was passed into law. It didn’t take long for those liberal-leaning Republican Wall Street financiers to get on board with the governor. Billionaire Paul Singer (whose son is living in a gay-lifestyle), and hedge fund managers Cliff Asness and Daniel Loeb were influential in passing same-sex “marriage” legislation. They wrote six-figure checks, totaling over one million dollars, to fund the public relations campaign for gay “marriage”. This level of support did not go unnoticed by Republicans who normally sought campaign funding from these same sources. 

He mentions the "letter of necessity" that Cuomo used to circumvent consideration of the bill in the Assembly. 

To get a vote this quickly, the governor had to send a letter of necessity to the Assembly, declaring that this legislation was critical to the state, and necessary, such that there was no time for it to go through the normal legislative process. 

 Once the bill was in the Senate, the governor went to work again. 

The Senate leadership and the governor’s staff made an agreement not to permit the same-sex “marriage” legislation to be laid aside or discussed. This blocked any debate and expedited the process. The governor wanted to have the vote pass in a manner that would allow for maximum coverage in that evening’s 11:00 PM newscasts. His staff was in full force on the Senate floor, working with various leaders, expediting the process to make the 11:00 o’clock deadline. It is highly unethical for the executive branch of government to be involved in the operation of the legislative branch.

Senators were locked into the chamber and lobbyists were locked out.

Senators were locked in the chamber so they could not disappear for the vote and be marked absent – or in Albany lingo ‘take a walk’. This is the first time I have seen senators locked in the chamber, forcing them to vote. Again, this seemed to be part of a broader effort to lock down the needed votes, and not let any peel away from taking a difficult vote.

The author makes clear that Republicans could have stopped this bill.

The Republican Party controls the state senate, giving them the authority to determine what to do with the legislation. They did not have to bring the legislation to the floor. The Senate Republican Conference could have stopped same-sex “marriage” in New York State, but they failed to do so. Twenty-nine Republicans voted against the bill on the floor, but it is not clear that they did all they could to keep it from coming to the floor in conference. It only takes seventeen senators in conference to hold a bill. 

How "Gay" Marriage Happened . . .

Here is a good discussion  [unfortunately not available at 4/25/13]of the vote on same sex "marriage" in New York state this past June 24th.   It's written by the Rev. Jason McGuire of New Yorker's Family Research Foundation.   He singles out a few cowran tim'rous beasties, but to tell the truth, it sounds like all the Republicans had panic in their breasties. 

The Senate GOP convinced itself that it was in their best interest to bring same-sex “marriage” to the floor for passage. They believe this action will remove the issue from the 2012 elections. Senate leadership, working with their Republican conference, devised a plan whereby they would permit a few votes to peel away causing the measure to ultimately pass, while allowing the majority of Republicans to maintain public positions of opposition. Republicans think this will protect their slim majority and allow their conference to return to power in 2013 and beyond. They are mistaken. 

Besides the State Republican Chairman, Ed Cox, and Dean Skelos who allowed the vote, there was Mayor Bloomberg.

When the Republicans were conferencing this issue, they allowed gay “marriage” supporter and major financial donor, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, into the meeting. We now know that other wealthy and liberal GOP donors reached out to the party’s leadership with promises of support in exchange for a vote on homosexual “marriage”. This should be understood as quid pro quo, an illegal action of exchanging one’s vote for some personal gain, but this is just the way corrupt and compromising elected officials get things done on Planet Albany.

When the decision was made to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, Republican leadership conspired with Governor Cuomo and Senate Democrats to hold no debate on the bill. They actually shut down Sen. Diaz (D-Bronx), the lone voice defending the family that night, while allowing openly-gay lawmaker Sen. Duane (D-Manhattan) to go on virtually unchecked.

The timing of the bill’s passage was designed to coincide with the 11 o’clock newscasts allowing Governor Cuomo maximum coverage. 

Republicans, thy wee-bit housie, too, in ruin!   Unfortunately, these beasties are taking us down with them. 

From Archbishop Dolan's Blog

Just to keep current, I wanted to post a few quotes from Archbishop Dolan's "Afterthoughts" about same sex marriage.   Although some might be saying that Dolan should have/could have done more (note here the suggestion that Cuomo be given a "public rebuke" by the bishops of New York), Dolan points out that legalizing same sex relationships has less to do with homosexuals wanting to marry and more to do with the homosexual lobbyists' desire to chip away at religious freedom, challenge the Church (Catholic, of course) and  define away traditional marriage and existing sexual norms (such as they are at this point).  

If the experience of those few other states and countries where this is already law is any indication, the churches, and believers, will soon be harassed, threatened, and hauled into court for their conviction that marriage is between one man, one woman, forever, bringing children into the world.  

the problem is not homophobia but theophobia — a hatred by some of God, faith, religion, and the Church. 

And now we ring the steeple bell again at this latest dilution of the authentic understanding of marriage, worried that the next step will be another redefinition to justify multiple partners and infidelity. If you think I’m exaggerating, within days of the passage of this bill, one major newspaper ran a flattering profile of a proponent of what was called “nonmonogamy.” Apparently, “nonmonogamy” is the idea that society is unrealistic to think that one man and one woman should remain faithful in marriage, and that openness to some infidelity should be the norm!

Sexual Liberationist Ideology

The term is not mine, but it's certainly an accurate and useful one.  Prof. Robert George uses it in this article which discusses the implications of legalizing same-sex marriage in New York state. 

The vote in New York to redefine marriage advances the cause of loosening norms of sexual ethics, and promoting as innocent — and even “liberating” — forms of sexual conduct that were traditionally regarded in the West and many other places as beneath the dignity of human beings as free and rational creatures.

Prof. George discusses the meaning of marriage in New York by saying,

What New York now offers its citizens is “marriage” in name only. In reality, it doesn’t give marriage to same-sex partners — the nature of marriage makes that impossible, just as it makes it impossible to offer marriage to parties of three or more persons in polyamorous sexual partnerships. Rather, it takes away the legal recognition of marriage — a comprehensive union of persons ordered to having and rearing a family. 

He goes on to explain how sexual norms will erode further.

Because these domestic partnerships are not actually marriages, despite the appropriation of the label; there is no intelligible basis in them for the norms of monogamy, exclusivity, and the pledge of permanence that structure and help to define marriage as historically understood in our law and culture. 

 
Prof. George's remarks put in perspective the New York Times article I referenced here.  In fact George cites the article himself and concludes

On sexual-liberationist premises, there is no reason (apart from the subjective tastes of this or that particular set of partners) for “marriages” to be monogamous and demand sexual fidelity.

There's much more good reading in this piece.  The culture wars continue.

Statement of Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn on Same Sex Marriage

I have been meaning to post this since reading it last week.  Highlights are mine.

Today, Governor Andrew Cuomo and the state legislature have deconstructed the single most important institution in human history. Republicans and Democrats alike succumbed to powerful political elites and have passed legislation that will undermine our families and as a consequence, our society.


With this vote, Governor Cuomo has opened a new front in the culture wars that are tearing at the fabric of our nation. At a time when so many New Yorkers are struggling to stay in their homes and find jobs, we should be working together to solve these problems. However, the politicians have curried favor with wealthy donors who are proponents of a divisive agenda in order to advance their own careers and futures.


What is needed in our state is leadership and not political gamesmanship.


In light of these disturbing developments and in protest for this decision, I have asked all Catholic schools to refuse any distinction or honors bestowed upon them this year by the governor or any member of the legislature who voted to support this legislation. Furthermore, I have asked all pastors and principals to not invite any state legislator to speak or be present at any parish or school celebration.


The above request is intended as a protest of the corrupt political process in New York State. More than half of all New Yorkers oppose this legislation. Yet, the governor and the state legislature have demonized people of faith, whether they be Muslims, Jews, or Christians, and identified them as bigots and prejudiced, and voted in favor of same-sex “marriage.” It is mystifying that this bill would be passed on the last day of an extended session under the cover of darkness.


This issue has been framed as upholding marriage equality. This is not the case since one of the principal purposes of marriage is to bring new life into the world. This cannot happen in same-sex marriage. It is not a civil rights issue, but rather a human rights issue upholding the age-old understanding of marriage. Our political leaders do not believe their own rhetoric. If they did, how in good conscience could they carve out any exemption for institutions that would be proponents of bigotry and prejudice?


Republicans and Democrats equally share responsibility for this ruinous legislation and we as Catholics should hold all accountable for their actions.

Beatification for the Ulma Family

I'm very late with this.  For several years, maybe 7 or 8, I've saved a newspaper clipping about Jozef and Wiktoria Ulma from the village of Markowa in Poland.  They and their seven children, the seventh being Wiktoria's unborn child in the womb, were murdered by the Nazis for harboring Jews.  The clipping I saved was brief in content, no more than a paragraph, but it left such an impression that it's never seemed quite right to throw it away.  

It would have been bad enough for the husband and wife to have been shot, but seven young children from ages 7 to 18 months?  How can one even begin to understand what it means to do that?    The unspeakably inhumane actions of the Germans are spelled out further in this Zenit article from earlier this year.   The beatification of the Ulma Family was, I believe, carried out in May of this year.