Talk:Same-sex marriage in New York

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

Untitled

edit

Do you mean in New York City? What about New Paltz?--Pharos 06:48, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

  • OK, it was just odd that New Paltz was not mentioned in the first version. The article now is considerably improved.--Pharos 23:07, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The NY Times is reporting that the Court rejected same-sex marriage. No article yet, it's just a breaking news headline. I threw this into the article, but will update it with more details as they are released. Liamdaly620 13:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

2009 Senate Vote Count

edit

People have been looking for the vote count because it is hard to find online. I posted it on Wiki today, It would be nice if someone revised it in a table showing party affiliation and how each senator casted their vote. This information is paramount to the future of Marriage in the State of New York because it is the first time NYS senators are put on record for their stance on the issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.179.251 (talk) 16:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

16:30, 3 December 2009 Czolgolz (talk | contribs) (45,951 bytes) (Undid revision 329477939 by 74.76.179.251 (talk) the vote count is really not neccessary, espcially in all caps) (undo)

I concede that perhaps the vote count is not needed in the form of all caps, however a table displaying how each senator voted is indeed historic and extremely relevant to the decision yesterday. You had a large number of democrats vote down the measure, a key swing republican/democrat senator Monserrate of Jackson Heights make a swing vote against the measure, and Gov. David Paterson is out praising the historic record of a first time vote in NYS Senate. Advocates of Gay Marriage believe that now there is a "path" (Gov. Patersons words) on what votes need to be considered. I do not see how a wikipedia page on NYS Gay Marriage could leave out that important record. I urge you to reconsider. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nycutiepi (talkcontribs) 16:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Documents on the NY leg website sometimes have names in all caps, so this was probably a case of copy & paste rather than somebody choosing to emphasize them. Шизомби (talk) 17:50, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

That is true, I did research and found the vote count on nys senate's webpage http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/api/html/bill/S66003, it is in all caps. But that again is an excuse for not allowing the posting of again material that is critical to the topic. The Governor of NYS as well as activists from leading groups in support of same sex marriage have outlined the significance of how senators voted, particularly the "swing senators" who were responsible for throwing the majority to the republicans this past summer. Opponents of the bill also point out that the fact that eight democratic senators (from nyc) having voted against the bill is again significant. By all means each side of this issue can agree that the vote count should be on record and should be public and I make my final request that it be included, perhaps in a form of a table outlining party affiliation (blue/red shading) as NYS Senate's wiki currently does. Again the webpage http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/api/html/bill/S66003 has the official vote count as a primary source document. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.179.251 (talk) 07:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Here is the table based off the senate wiki...the table has the bill s66003 vote count referenced with its primary source document...I will leave it for an administrator to make the call if this table should be added.

District Senator Party Vote on S66003[1] Residence
1 Kenneth LaValle Republican NAY Port Jefferson
2 John J. Flanagan Republican NAY East Northport
3 Brian X. Foley Democratic AYE Blue Point
4 Owen H. Johnson Republican NAY West Babylon
5 Carl Marcellino Republican NAY Syosset
6 Kemp Hannon Republican NAY Garden City
7 Craig Johnson Democratic AYE Port Washington
8 Charles Fuschillo Republican NAY Merrick
9 Dean Skelos Republican NAY Rockville Centre
10 Shirley Huntley Democratic NAY Jamaica
11 Frank Padavan Republican NAY Bellerose
12 George Onorato Democratic NAY Astoria
13 Hiram Monserrate Democratic NAY Jackson Heights
14 Malcolm Smith Democratic AYE St. Albans
15 Joseph Addabbo, Jr. Democratic NAY Ozone Park
16 Toby Ann Stavisky Democratic AYE Flushing
17 Martin Malave Dilan Democratic AYE Bushwick
18 Velmanette Montgomery Democratic AYE Brooklyn
19 John Sampson Democratic AYE Brooklyn
20 Eric Adams Democratic AYE Brooklyn
21 Kevin Parker Democratic AYE Brooklyn
22 Martin Golden Republican NAY Bay Ridge
23 Diane Savino Democratic AYE Staten Island
24 Andrew Lanza Republican NAY Staten Island
25 Dan Squadron Democratic AYE Brooklyn
26 Liz Krueger Democratic AYE New York
27 Carl Kruger Democratic NAY Brooklyn
28 Jose M. Serrano Democratic AYE Spanish Harlem
29 Thomas Duane Democratic AYE New York
30 Bill Perkins Democratic AYE Harlem
31 Eric Schneiderman Democratic AYE Washington Heights
32 Rubén Díaz Democratic NAY Soundview
33 Pedro Espada Democratic AYE Mamaroneck
34 Jeffrey Klein Democratic AYE Throgs Neck
35 Andrea Stewart-Cousins Democratic AYE Yonkers
36 Ruth Hassell-Thompson Democratic AYE Williamsbridge
37 Suzi Oppenheimer Democratic AYE Mamaroneck
38 Thomas Morahan Republican NAY Clarkstown
39 Bill Larkin Republican NAY New Windsor
40 Vincent Leibell Republican NAY Patterson
41 Stephen Saland Republican NAY Poughkeepsie
42 John Bonacic Republican NAY Mount Hope
43 Roy McDonald Republican NAY Stillwater
44 Hugh Farley Republican NAY Schenectady
45 Betty Little Republican NAY Queensbury
46 Neil Breslin Democratic AYE Albany
47 Joseph Griffo Republican NAY Rome
48 Darrel Aubertine Democratic NAY Cape Vincent
49 David Valesky Democratic AYE Oneida
50 John DeFrancisco Republican NAY Syracuse
51 James Seward Republican NAY Milford
52 Thomas W. Libous Republican NAY Binghamton
53 George H. Winner, Jr. Republican NAY Elmira
54 Michael Nozzolio Republican NAY Fayette
55 James Alesi Republican NAY East Rochester
56 Joseph Robach Republican NAY Greece
57 Catharine Young Republican NAY Olean
58 William Stachowski Democratic NAY Lake View
59 Dale Volker Republican NAY Depew
60 Antoine Thompson Democratic AYE Buffalo
61 Michael Ranzenhofer Republican NAY Clarence
62 George D. Maziarz Republican NAY Newfane
A nicely-designed table! Were there an article on the 2009 bills, it would be good for that. Here, it would take up a lot of space, though as something hidden by default it might be good. I'm not sure (and was just wondering elsewhere) about the style guide on the show/hide function. Шизомби (talk) 16:00, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

References

2007 June update?

edit

I'm reading online (e.g., OutZone.com) that the NY House approved same-sex marriage legislation championed by Daniel O'Donnell, but that the NY Senate is expected to reject it. No mention in the article. Update? Even if it doesn't pass, a comprehensive article on the subject should mention the activity on the issue, seems to me. Lawikitejana 03:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

"Recognition" seems severely overstated

edit

The lede in this article says that NY state recognizes same-sex marraiges performed elsewhere. However, when discussing the details, it mentions only that the state govt. will administrtavely recognize such marriages when making decisions about partner benefits for its pension plans. This is a far cry from actually recognizing these marriages as marriages under New York state law, which would carry with them a whole host of other rights and responsibilities involving tax law, spousal support, rights to private insurance, child custody, etc. If none of these are touched on by the NY state decision, then this really needs to be reworded. --Jfruh (talk) 23:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Should be interesting to see what happens with all the inevitable appeals and subsequent court cases. New York is adjacent to three jurisdictions (Ontario, Québec, Massachusetts) which perform actual marriages, so the issue will inevitably keep arising in court cases in various contexts. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 02:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

The NY courts have now recognized same-sex marriages for purposes of inheritance and divorce (at least twice), and reportedly also adoption though I can't find the reference. I think this is cut-and-dried -- NY really is recognizing same-sex marriages from Canada, Massachusetts, etc. 67.241.26.34 (talk) 06:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Lengthy quotation from Governor Paterson is unnecessary

edit

The gratuituous, self-congratulatory remarks from Governor Paterson are inappropriate. They read more like advocacy than like an encyclopedia entry. If anyone believes that these remarks should be retained, please advise.

SCBC (talk) 19:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

i have redacted the paterson reference and removed all but the pertinent statement. i think it is important as a promise which was made but is hard to find documented on the internet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.15.30.166 (talk) 18:53, 25 May 2008 (UTC) --PauljoffeReply

Thank you.

SCBC (talk) 21:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Removal of "pro-family"

edit

This term is POV. Groups/people on both sides of the issue may be pro-family or anti-family, depending on the POV.Gimmethoseshoes (talk) 05:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

artical out of date

edit

this is very out of date it mentions a vote planed for June 24 2009 it is august and the vote is expected in early September —Preceding unsigned comment added by The truth maker (talkcontribs) 20:19, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Senate more conservative than population?

edit

The claim made in the opening paragraph about the NY State Senate being more conservative than the population cites an opinion column from The Guardian. As there is no scientific data to support that claim aside from the results of one vote, I don't think that's a fair claim to make. Does anyone else feel the same way, or am I just reading too much into this? Marchoi (talk) 03:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I wondered about that myself. It may be true, but there could stand to be a better source for it. It is true that the vote of the Senate went more conservative than the polling of New Yorkers on this issue. Шизомби (talk) 04:34, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply
The NY Senate is famously gerrymandered to benefit the incumbent Republicans (a complex story in itself -- the Assembly is gerrymandered to benefit the incumbent Democrats), so there's no real dispute over whether it's more conservative than than the population as a whole. It is. I think the difference between the Senate vote and the polling is enough evidence for this article. 74.79.28.150 (talk)

New York SIXTH state to legalize same-sex marriage?

edit

According to http://www.statesthatallowgaymarriage.com/ New York was the SIXTH state to legalize same-sex marriage.

Should that be changed from "seventh" state on the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.153.102.75 (talk) 15:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

See Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States#States_that_license_same-sex_marriage_.28table.29. Your source is miscounting California. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 19:27, 25 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Same-sex marriage in New York. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Same-sex marriage in New York. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Same-sex marriage in New York. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:08, 3 November 2017 (UTC)Reply