Thursday, May 29, 2008

Paterson's Sneaky Gay Marriage End-Run

What a shocker. Another sneaky Democrat pulling a fast one on an unwitting public and basically enforcing gay marriage without a vote by the people or legislation by elected officials.

Why are proponents of gay marriage so afraid to let the will of the people be heard?

Because they know it will lose every time, as it has across the nation.

If New York's governor had any guts he would run on the issue in 2010. But he's a Democrat, so screw the people.

I have no problem if states either pass legislation or the people vote for gay marriage. But judicial activism or dead of night moves like this by public officials only further antagonize opponents. This is a democracy, not a dictatorship.
Gov. David A. Paterson has directed all state agencies to begin to revise their policies and regulations to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions, like Massachusetts, California and Canada.

In a directive issued on May 14, the governor’s legal counsel, David Nocenti, instructed the agencies that gay couples married elsewhere “should be afforded the same recognition as any other legally performed union.”

The revisions are most likely to involve as many as 1,300 statutes and regulations in New York governing everything from joint filing of income tax returns to transferring fishing licenses between spouses.

In a videotaped message given to gay community leaders at a dinner on May 17, Mr. Paterson described the move as “a strong step toward marriage equality.” And people on both sides of the issue said it moved the state closer to fully legalizing same-sex unions in this state.

“Very shortly, there will be hundreds and hundreds and hundreds, and probably thousands and thousands and thousands of gay people who have their marriages recognized by the state,” said Assemblyman Daniel O’Donnell, a Democrat who represents the Upper West Side and has pushed for legalization of gay unions.
O'Donnell, by the way, is the openly-gay brother of a certain celebutard.
Massachusetts and California are the only states that have legalized gay marriage, while others, including New Jersey and Vermont, allow civil unions. Forty-one states have laws limiting marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Legal experts said Mr. Paterson’s decision would make New York the only state that did not itself allow gay marriage but fully recognized same-sex unions entered into elsewhere.

The directive is the strongest signal yet that Mr. Paterson, who developed strong ties to the gay community as a legislator, plans to push aggressively to legalize same-sex unions as governor. His predecessor, Eliot Spitzer, introduced a bill last year that would have legalized gay marriage, but even as he submitted it, doubted that it would pass. The Democratic-dominated Assembly passed the measure, but the Republican-led Senate has refused to call a vote on it.
Groups that oppose gay marriage said the governor was essentially trying to circumvent the Legislature.

It’s a perfect example of a governor overstepping his authority and sidestepping the democratic process,” said Brian Raum, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a national organization opposed to same-sex marriage. “It’s an issue of public policy that should be decided by the voters.”
Even when Democrats slip one by the public, it's never enough for those in the minority.
While gay rights advocates widely praised the spirit of Mr. Paterson’s policy, some saw more than a little irony in the fact that New York has yet to allow gays to marry.

“If you’re going to treat us as equals, why don’t you just give us the marriage license?” said Alan Van Capelle, executive director of Empire State Pride Agenda. “So this is a temporary but necessary fix for a longer-term problem, which is marriage equality in New York State.”
OK then, put it to a vote and let the people decide.

Naturally, the AP trumpets recent actions in California and New York as wins for gay advocates. Is it really winning when you thwart the will of the people?

Seems more like cheating to me.

No comments: