I was following the debate until about 6:45pm (and will cover the vote if it occurs before that time) in the NY Assembly. Please follow me over the jump for (previously live) coverage. It is expected by many observers that the Assembly will pass this bill today and send it to the NY State Senate, where the vote is very close. The question today is how strong the vote will be in the Assembly, and if it will indicate to the Senate that it is safe to vote for marriage equality.
You can also listen live for yourself: http://assembly.state.ny.us/...
Also, please note that none of these should be read as perfect quotes. This is not a transcript. There is a bit of paraphrasing that had to be done in order to get this out in real time.
4:52pm - Assemblyman Daniel O'Donnell of Manhattan (openly gay and one of only three openly gay members of the Assembly; the other two, Titone and Glick, speak below) introduces and explains his bill, which amends the Domestic Relations Law of New York.
5:00pm - A questioner (Assemblyman Jack Quinn of Erie County) is now asking a number of questions of Assemblyman O'Donnell, who is replying one question at a time.
Selected questions:
Q: We prohibit polygamy correct? As a matter of public policy?
A: Yes.
Q: Why are you doing this?
A: NY's highest court said petitioners must go to the legislature to get marriage equality.
Q: Fiscal impact?
A: Possibly hugely positive! Maybe many couple will come to get married. See, e.g., Iowa.
Q: Social security?
A: Covered by feds.
Q: Will religious persons be required to solemnize same-sex marriages.
A: Bill specifically says no religious person is required to solemnize any same-sex marriage. Bill does not require any person to preside over same-sex marriages. It only requires the state to issue licenses. Clerks offices have many people. My expectation is that anyone who wants to get married will be able to find a clerk to perform that ceremony.
Q: Health insurance? Some employers object to same-sex marriages.
A: Employers will have to treat all marriage licenses the same. They do not get to pick and choose.
Assemblyman Richard Brodsky of Westchester rises in support to speak on behalf of the bill and to address some of Mr. Quinn's questions.
Brodsky: there is a human face to this debate. We have come to a time in our history, when we do not impose our views on the rights of others. There was a time when as a matter of politics and theology, women were not allowed to vote and african americans were [segregated?]. We don't do that anymore. All people are equal. This bill does not impinge on anyone's religious views. The political, social and theological difficulties of transition and change are great. But the time has come. I urge this house to embrace enlightened decency.
New questioner Assemblyman Michael Fitzpatrick
Answers by Mr. O'Donnell.
Q: This bill will force everyone to recognize a gay marriage, correct?
A: We already recognize gay marriages from outside NY.
Q: My point is that it will force the rest of society (except religious institutions) to recognize gay marriages. No conscientious objectors allowed. Correct? Would a parent be allowed to remove children from school discussion about gay marriage?
A: This bill does not relate to that question at all. Public schools regulate how and when children may be excused. This bill does not affect education about tolerance or diversity.
Q: I think it does.
A: [Emphatically] I should have the same right you people do. Some of you have done this 3 or 4 times.
Q: It is wrong for organizations to be forced to recognize gay marriages in violation of their principles.
Q: Marriage throughout history has been between a man and a woman. It is for procreative purposes. Same-sex marriage denies a child a mother or father. This bill builds a legal contract on a lifestyle I do not condone.
Assemblyman Matthew Titone (openly gay, from Staten Island):
Talks about personal angle -- exclusion from hospitalized partner, alumni magazine. Generalizes: gay people are so often brutalized and dehumanized. Personally appeals to fellow Assembly members to remember their families and constituents. This is not about religious marriage. This is about civil marriage, a civil right.
Assemblyman Mark Schroeder of Erie County
The words marriage equality do not appear in the bill. But proponents and the media use the phrase. But this is not marriage equality. This is just municipal equality. No municipality can discriminate. Religious institutions can. See section 4 of the bill, lines 49-51.
Assemblyman Dov Hikind of Brooklyn
Proponents say supporting this bill means supporting human rights and against discrimination. I want to reassure those not supporting this bill you are not guilty of those things. I am in favor of human rights as much as anyone. But I do not support this bill. Yeah, there are plenty of ways for people to be happy. In Canada right now, there is a court case where someone with 17 wives wants those marriages recognized. The issue to me is the Bible, the Torah. This is about what God wants! We cannot pick and choose from God's rules! This undermines the foundation of traditional marriage. My position is exactly the same as the President, the Vice-President and the Secretary of State! I cannot deny what God says clearly to me and to hundreds of millions of people around the world.
(Yes he totally sounds like a Southern bible thumper. And he really said "This is about what God wants! We cannot pick and choose from God's rules!")
Assemblyman Joel Miller of Dutchess county
Homosexuality is not a choice. People don't choose a life of being abused. The military depends on gay people. Religions tell us plenty of thigns: like the sun goes around the earth. But we have separation of church and state in this country, not just to protect the church, but also to protect the state. People discriminate against gays because government discriminates against gays. It is time to stop this discrimination. People don't care what goes on in their neighbors' homes. Gay marriage will not affect my marriage or your marriage. This is not about procreation. Couples who decide not to have children or can't have children are not forbidden from marriage. Religion should have nothing to do with this. Marriage is legal entity created by government. This is America. There is no room for discrimination of any kind.
Assemblyman Michael Benjamin (a black member from the Bronx) asks questions of Mr. O'Donnell.
Q: Black slaves were prohibited from marrying. But homosexuals were never enslaved.
A: Slavery is a separate question.
Q: We didn't need a constitutional amendment to permit homosexuals to vote or become citizens of our nation, correct?
A: I believe the equal protection clause provide equal right to all people.
Q: Referring to Loving v. Virginia, I take offense at equating gay rights to the history of struggle of African-Americans.
A: Mrs. Loving herself says she supports marriage equality.
Q: Has any homosexual couple been arrested for attempting to marry.
A: It has happened.
Q: If this law passes, it will be on a collision course with religious freedom. In cal., students were taken to a same-sex wedding.
Assemblyman Andrew Hevesi of Queens
This is the right thing to do. And if it fails, we are going to come back every year until the other house sees the light until it passes.
Assemblywoman Janet Duprey of Franklin and Clinton counties, far upstate, bordering Canada and Vermont.
When I ran in 2006, I said marriage is between a man and a woman. I was deeply moved during the debate in 2007, I voted against the bill but said I'd keep an open mind. I have received many phone calls and email and met many of my constituents. The ones who have moved me the most are the parents of homosexual parents. I have met many gays and lesbians -- they are only asking for equal protection under the law. This is not a religious issue. It is a civil rights issue. I proudly vote in favor today.
Assemblywoman Sandy Galef of Putnam and Westchester counties.
I say ditto. Civil Union is not good enough. People generally and private companies don't know what it means. So civil unions do not provide equity. I urge my colleagues to consider this.
Assemblyman Joseph Lentol of Brooklyn
I am a very proud Catholic. I am not changing my vote. There are two commandments: love the Lord, and love one another. In respose to Hikind Although more of my constituents oppose this bill, I will vote in favor because of my faith. The principle is shall we treat one another equally? We have not treated each other equally always, as Mr. Benjamin recounted. I vote for love one another. [Applause]
Assemblywoman Deborah Glick of Manhattan (openly lesbian)
Recounts the history of marriage as being about property, and alliances between powerful families. Romance enters late in history. Marriage has been evolving over time. The bill permits religious institutions and certain private clubs to discriminate. Mentions racial and gender segregation in the military. This has to do with the level of comfort of straight folks. Any change in status quo makes us uncomfortable. I have been a member of this house and I do not have the same rights as you, save two. The inexorable march of history is on our side. Young people could care less. In all of your districts there are young people who understand that we are who we are, and it is not a choice. I came from the same family that produced three straight daughters. So when people start talking about natural law and what's natural, this is natural. The constitution is about preserving the rights of minorities.
[OK Kossacks -- I gotta run. Hope you enjoyed the liveblogging.]