As announced last Wednesday in the New York Times, two dozen of the state's top business leaders have released an open letter to Albany legislature urging them to pass the marriage equality bill that will soon come to a vote.
To remain competitive, New York must continue to contend with other world cities to attract top talent. Increasingly, in an age where talent determines the economic winners, great states and cities must demonstrate a commitment to creating an open, healthy and equitable environment in which to live and work.
This is why it is so important that New York State grant full rights to all of its citizens by passing marriage equality.
I don't employ hyperbole lightly, but I will use it where appropriate. And "Titans" is a pretty accurate word to describe the list of 23 signatories that includes the past and present CEOs and top executives of Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Revlon, Viacom, Reuters and a wide variety of finance, real estate, media, law and other professions. With only a few exceptions they all have dedicated profile pages on Forbes.com. How many of us can say that?
And it should be noted, the list also includes more than a few well-known Republicans.
Kudos to New Yorkers United For Marriage the coalition of advocates that successfully enlisted our friends in the world of business to stump for the cause. The full letter after the fold.
With full support from Governor Cuomo's office, New York's 4 major LGBT equality groups will be joining forces this week in the on-going campaign for marriage equality in New York.
Marriage Equality New York (MENY), Freedom to Marry, Empire State Pride Agenda (ESPA), and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) will unite as one organization, New Yorkers United for Marriage; working with one voice to secure passage of a marriage equality bill by early summer.
This is AWESOME, though I'm not sure how effective it may be in achieving what I think she (and I, and the monsters) want. It seems that none other than Lady Gaga herself has called forth her "monsters" to reach out and touch freshman Senator Mark Grisanti (R) of Buffalo in regards to marriage equality in New York State. Check it:
No idea why she chose Grisanti, but she has, and the "monsters" are burning up the twitters telling her that they have heeded her call. I fear for Senator Grisanti's inbox, but I applaud both Lady Gaga and her followers for making their voices heard. Bless 'em.
(Full disclosure: I, as of last Wed, am longer employed by the Senate. More on that later.)
That former Congressman Chris Lee was so attracted to cross-dressers and transsexuals should not be a source of ridicule and derision. People in a free country can - and ought to have the right to - love, or have sex with, any willing partner. That Lee betrayed traditional family values is none of our business, and that he trolled Craigslist for dates with women, and women with penises alike, is newsworthy for its lack of good judgment, but were he a private citizen it would not be our concern - no big deal. His hasty self-return to private life is now explained. As a public figure, it matters because his brazen Craigslist hookups and flailing cover-up were not just hypocritical, but indiscreet.
...
It all underscores the fact that the Republican anti-gay platform merely panders to the radical Christian fundamentalists who partly puppeteer that party. There are plenty of LGBT Republicans, and their personal, private sexual lives are nobody's business. It's ok to be a gay Republican.
Imagine what a better country this would be if sexuality was divorced (so to speak) from politics. If homophobia was excised from politics and from parties' platforms, the only place it would remain socially acceptable would be in the pews, prayers, and pulpits of radically fundamentalist houses of worship. Imagine if the very first public proclamation by Republican congressional candidates didn'tinvolve homophobia.
The Republican Party used to stand for less government, (despite never practicing what they preach). Yet when it comes to sexuality, they out-Puritan the Puritans, which makes it exquisitely embarrassing when someone with an (R) after their name is caught outside the wife-two-kids norm.
Whenever the topic turns to treating homosexuals like people, some cretin will chime in with an uninformed slippery slope argument about how tolerance of gay unions will lead to bestiality, pedophilia, and polygamy. It's a false equivalence; those three activities are victimization and abuse; of kids, of animals, and of multiple women. It's those kinds of "arguments" that hamstring rational discussion about this particular issue - because its terms are dictated and framed by the radical fundamentalists and their puppets.
Sexuality has nothing to do with running the country. It's time to legalize gay marriage - by Constitutional amendment if necessary - and to completely separate sexuality and state. Chris Lee and Carl Paladino will thank you.
First, can I just say how sad it makes me watch this guy who first got elected in the year Ford lost to Carter, dawdle on the stage while proudly swearing that he'll be happy to stand in the way of full equality? Not only that, but he's proud to say that should the GOP take the Senate back, not only will they not pass a Marriage Equality bill or GENDA, but that they will stop "plenty of other things, too" in a pitch perfect grumpy grandpa voice.
That's what's at stake next Tuesday. Just so everyone knows.
Haile Rivera is urging that Sen. Ruben Diaz be made majority leader of the state senate. He also wants Gustavo Rivera, the man who defeated the current majority leader Sen. Pedro Espada, to back Diaz for majority leader. Funny enough, Diaz recently issued a statement saying that another Hispanic should replace Espada, he even suggest Rivera as a candidate, but said he would not take the post.
Yeah, appoint the anti-gay bigot and guy under investigation for nonprofit abuse to Majority Leader. I guess there are big shoes to fill with Pedro on his way out...
In all seriousness, Diaz and his supporters have a point that there is a dearth of latinos in state power positions, but Ruben Diaz Sr. is the last one that should be under consideration. If the Senate Dems do this, it will be rightly interpreted as a collective middle finger to the pro-equality forces in the state.
Charlie Ramos is having a small-dollar fundraiser tonight. With less than 2 weeks until the primary, he can use all the help he can get in order to defeat one of the worst, most disgusting bigots in office in the entire country. You can RSVP here:
Come out and support Charlie Ramos in his efforts to defeat Ruben Diaz Sr. Diaz is the number one obstructionist for Equality in NY. Charlie can beat him, but he needs our help!
Besides being the strongest opponent of Marriage Equality in New York, Diaz claims that same-sex marriage will bring the end of the world.
In 2003, Diaz filed a lawsuit to stop the expansion of the Harvey Milk School, claiming th...at the school infringed upon the rights of heterosexual students.
Also, Diaz oppose the "Gay games" from coming to NY, claiming that doing so would lead to an increase in AIDS and a wider acceptance of homosexuality by young people.
DIAZ HAS TO GO!!!! Come show your support and give what you can. Do it for your Equality if nothing else :)
If you are unable to make the event, but still want to contribute to Equality, please visit Charlie's contribution page: https://secure.actblue.com/con...
In New York, battlelines are being sharply drawn between bigotry and equality. And leadership is losing the will to stand with bigotry, no matter how well entrenched its proponents are.
The background is, there was a fundraiser last night for New York State Seantor Ruben Diaz. A Pentecostal minister, Diaz has been the single biggest impediment to the progress of LGBT affirmative legislation in New York state. He stood alone on the Senate floor and urged a no vote on the historic marriage equality bill last December. Unfortunately, despite a dozen senators taking to the floor in suport of equality, and only one Senator speaking against it, the vote failed.
Just this June, Diaz also used his committee position to vote down the movement of GENDA bill, which would have extended discrimination protection to the transgender community. (Yes, NY still does not have that, shamefully.)
Increasingly, the LGBT community is recognizing that equality in New York State can not move forward, so long a Diaz remains in the Senate. Removing Diaz is the single biggest victory LGBT New Yorkers, and their supporters, could score.
When local LGBT activists got wind that New York State Senate Majority Leader John Sampson lent his name and planned to co-host a fundraiser for Daiz, Queer Rising planned a protest. It's all well and good to protest Diaz himself, but he is frankly, unreachable. He has told supporters:
"These election results will be vital to us as Christians and God-fearing people to keep our family, moral and traditional values that our ancestors left us and that the Bible teaches us."
Another politician who can't distinguish the Bible from the Constitution, or Democracy from Theocracy.
So activists have expanded their focus to include John Sampson's complicity with LGBT disenfranchisement. The message: you can't have it both ways any longer. You can't support the LGBT community and those that fight the LGBT community.
The Gotham Gazette has a good profile of the SD-33 race featuring Charlie Ramos vs. Albany's biggest (and possibly most self-hating) bigot, Ruben Diaz Sr.:
On the bed of a white pickup truck stands a man in a pearl cowboy hat and white Western-style shirt. The stitched red lettering on its back reads, "Senador Ruben Diaz." Techno music blasts from loudspeakers mounted on top of the pickup, accompanied by a voice reminding people to "Votar, votar, votar!" on Sept. 14. It is July 31st --there are 45 days to the primary.
The message cycles from Spanish to English. Four vans trail behind the pickup, some emblazoned with: "Vote Ruben Diaz. A True Democrat. !Nuestro Lider!" Traffic snarls as the 67-year-old Diaz orders the caravan to a halt. "Lets go!" he says, launching himself out of the back of the bed.
And go he must.
This year, Sen. Ruben Diaz is facing a rare primary challenge from a young community organizer, Charlie Ramos. Despite the many issues that face the people of the Bronx, the race has been focused on same-sex marriage -- which Diaz staunchly opposes.
The whole thing is definitely worth a read. It shows how Diaz's special interest money allows him to pay for essentially a mobile party everywhere he goes.
Two things also stand out in this article. First Ramos has only about $6000 on hand now. While I don't expect the pro-LGBT rights community to have much organizational pull in this district, I expected a lot more in terms of raising money. The gay rights community has mounted much more impressive fundraising efforts in other prominent legislative races against high-profile bigot incumbents. I was hoping for a lot more, but it's still not too late. You can give Charlie some coin here.
Second, there's this passage:
[Ramos] has had trouble drumming up support in the community. He says it's because people are afraid to anger Diaz. "I'm going against the machine. Folks sit me down behind closed doors and say, 'I can't support you in public but I support you.' They don't want to do anything to upset the reverend or his son, the borough president." Ramos says he has "silent supporters."
I really wonder who these people are and why they're afraid of Diaz (Sr. or Jr.). The only people who should be afraid are those involved with nonprofits that benefit from the largess of either Diaz's public funds. Other than that, Diaz Sr. is certainly not powerful enough to be able to intimidate people and I don't think Jr. would really be that vindictive- he has aspirations for higher office and I can't see him wanting to make enemies. So to all those silent Ramos supporters, I say come out of the closet!
Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.
...
The arguments surrounding Proposition 8 raise a question similar to that addressed in Lawrence, when the Court asked whether a majority of citizens could use the power of the state to enforce "profound and deep convictions accepted as ethical and moral principles" through the criminal code. ... The question here is whether California voters can enforce those same principles through regulation of marriage licenses. They cannot. California's obligation is to treat its citizens equally, not to "mandate [its] own moral code."
Hope this doesn't turn me gay before nightfall and that the institution of marriage might survive at least through the weekend...
UPDATE: Much more on this from New Yorker in good standing Adam Bink at Prop 8 Trial Tracker.
Sen. Ruben Diaz has an annoying political survival instinct, but we want to set the record straight. We can help shift the playing field by showing that Diaz is not only bad for LGBT people - he's bad for New York. With just 6 weeks to go before the primary, we need your help to fund a search into Ruben's closet. We'll post our research online, so his opponents, the media, and voters in his district will know the real Ruben Diaz.
The link also has a good summary of Diaz's bigoted statements and actions throughout his career.
Diaz is by far the biggest bigot in the State Senate and he needs to be removed from office in 6 weeks. So if you or anyone you know has dirt on Diaz, or you want to help fund those who will find it, I strongly suggest donating to this campaign.
Also, for clarification, I don't know anything about Diaz's sexual preferences. However, with the long history of the most virulent anti-gay bigots being gay themselves, I wouldn't be surprised if Diaz's extreme homophobic views are caused by his possible own suppressed homosexuality. But again, that's only speculation on my part.
The continued logic has been that Rev. Ruben Diaz isn't such a bad Democrat. Sure he was the main leader against marriage equality. Sure he supported and supports Monserrate and Espada no matter their treachery or corruption. But in the end, he's still a Democrat on most issues, right? If this sounds a little bit like Joe "With Us on Everything But the War" Lieberman, then you're not going to be surprised at the punchline. In a letter released today relating to marriage equality, Diaz Sr. officially crossed party lines and endorsed Frank Padavan over Tony Avella. And it was all over a single issue; marriage equality.
Senators Shirley Huntley, Frank Padavan and Hiram Monserrate were instrumental in joining me to defeat the gay marriage bill in the New York State Senate. Today the State of New York does not have legalized gay marriage and we have to praise God and thank Senators Shirley Huntley, Frank Padavan and Hiram Monserrate.
They all risked their chances of being elected in order to take this stand.
We in the Christian community - and all God-fearing people - owe them our support, our respect and our help.
The homosexual community has targeted the three of them and put candidates - funded with money from the homosexual community - so their candidate can vote for gay marriage next year.
Therefore, I am counting on all of you to not only pray for Senators Shirley Huntley, Frank Padavan and Hiram Monserrate, but to also offer them all of the support and help that you can give during their re-election efforts or elections to another position.
As a State Senator, a Pastor, and a Christian, I need Senators Shirley Huntley, Frank Padavan and Hiram Monserrate back in the New York State legislature for next year when the gay marriage issue will take top priority in New York State. We do not have the luxury of losing these three legislators who have fought so hard for our family, moral and traditional values in the State legislature.
That's right folks. Diaz Sr. supporting and endorsing a corrupt, expelled Senator and a crotchety anti-progress Republican going up against a strong, reform-oriented Democrat. In one of the best races in the state, in a year where redistricting and future control of the Senate is on the line, one of our 32 members of the State Senate caucus crosses over and gives his full support and blessings to Frank Padavan.
The National Organization for Marriage, the best-funded and most media-visible anti-marriage equality group in the country, is in the midst of a Summer for Marriage bus tour of (mostly) state capitals designed to gin up opposition to gay marriage.
NOM front man Brian Brown said the plan is to:
get on the road and meet people face-to-face, sharing with them the importance of marriage and how critical the future of marriage is to our country.
Brown's message is not resonating. The first two stops, in Augusta, ME, and Concord, NH, drew less than 100 people, and the "crowd" at the third stop, in Albany, NY, today was closer to 50 than 100.
Disclosure: I am a proud volunteer for the Charlie Ramos for State Senate campaign.
Today Empire State Pride Agenda endorsed Charlie Ramos for State Senate. This might not surprise some of you; Charlie is running against the fiercest opponent of marriage equality and LGBT rights in the New York State Senate. But it's not just that ESPA endorsed Charlie, but rather that Charlie was the only candidate running in a competitive Democratic primary to receive the endorsement of the organization at this time.
As we've discussed previously, there are many targets in the fight for marriage equality, including 6 Democrats that voted against marriage equality (excluding Monserrate and Onorato). We have competitive primaries against three of them; Diaz Sr., Huntley, and Stachowski. As we get closer and closer to the primary, progressive advocates will need to start choosing races to invest their time and resources in order to maximize our success this cycle. After all, we're competing in an environment with more targets than ever before.
That's why I'm supporting Charlie. Not only is Charlie running a strong grassroots campaign in the Bronx with a great legion of field volunteers, but he's also the best candidate to maximize our strike against opponents of marriage equality. Taking down Ruben Diaz Sr. will send the strongest message to swing votes in the State Senate that voting against equality is a losing issue and we'll come after you if you vote against it again. It's the maximum bang for our buck.
It's clear today that Empire State Pride Agenda figured that out. They join Stonewall Democrats and Marriage Equality New York from the LGBT front (as well as many other progressive organizations). Will more progressive and LGBT organizations get it and start supporting Charlie? Stay tuned.
Don't get me wrong. I really like Fight Back NY, a PAC started by Tim Gill and other major LGBT donors that intends to help take down bag Democrats. I like the fact that they're working to knock off Democrats who voted against marriage equality. And I like the fact that they're willing to work outside party structures and create their own infrastructure that supports progressive change. Unfortunately, I have to take issue with their decision today to target Bill Stachowski as their second major target in the campaign for marriage equality (with Monserrate being the first).
Bill Stackowski is a bad Democrat. That much we know. He voted against marriage equality, he's not very popular in his district, and lately he's been holding up the budget by his insistence on a pure and uncompromosing version of the SUNY flexibility bill. But in 2010, it's not good enough to simply say "This is a Bad Democrat". As I said on this blog many months ago, we need Better Democrats . And the man in the Democratic primary against Bill Stachowski, Tim Kennedy, is not a Better Democrat .
I had the pleasure of attending a well-attended fundraiser for Charlie Ramos on Sunday. While I had met Charlie once before, I came away with the strong feeling that I was talking to the next State Senator from the Bronx. 2010 is the year of the anti-incumbent and the year of the reformer in New York State and throughout the country. We have an incredible chance to change our State Senate and support great reform candidates. While there's a lot of candidates out there to support this cycle, I now believe that Charlie Ramos should be right at the top of the list.
Liz is reporting that the Slasher's minions have been handing out this flyer in the district, accusing Assemblyman Peralta of being a tool of "Rich Gay Fanatics." I kid you not:
Marriage is a sacred covenant between a man and his physically abused wife. Just when you thought the Slasher couldn't go any lower.
State Sen. George Onorato, a veteran Queens Democrat, won't seek reelection to the seat he has held since 1983, clearing the way for a run this fall by Assemblyman Michael Gianaris.
At 82, Onorato is the Senate Democrats' oldest member. His recent "no" vote on gay marriage made him vulnerable to a primary challenge, worrying party leaders who urged him to step aside, insiders said.
Jeremiah Frei-Pearson, who had been touted by reformers as a breath of fresh air untainted by the Albany incumbency, has bowed out of the race.
But soon-to-be-former Senator Onorato can stand as a testament to the career-ending risks inherent in opposing civil rights for all Americans.
This ain't Oklahoma - or Tennessee, for that matter.
There are plenty of interesting things in the Q poll released today that I have already covered and plenty more that will be covered.
The subject of marriage equality was brought up in the poll and deserves its own post, mainly because there are a few key factors at play that affect the support (or opposition) for marriage equality.
The Q poll found that 47 percent of New Yorkers support marriage equality and 46 percent oppose it. There are a small percentage of individuals - seven percent - who don't know or have no opinion on the issue.
Support for marriage equality in the Q poll has fluctuated slightly this year. In May, support and opposition to equality were even at 46 percent. In June, however, that increased to 51 percent (a majority of voters) saying they supported marriage equality with 41 percent opposing.
This Q poll breaks it down to where the support and opposition come from. And the three major factors at work are age, education and income.
AGE
The most support for marriage equality in terms of age falls in the obvious category: Young people ages 18 to 34. This is where 58 percent of respondents said they support marriage equality while only 37 percent oppose it. This isn't surprising, as these numbers are in line with what we have seen in other states where marriage equality is a hot-button issue.
Even though that younger generation is where strong support lies, there is support for marriage equality in the 35 to 54 age group. More respondents - 48 percent - support marriage equality than those who oppose it (45 percent). This age group, like in another states, is considered the turning point.
When the question is asked of those over 55, the support for marriage equality decreases significantly to 37 percent with 56 percent opposing equal rights.
Therefore, there is a strong conclusion to make: The younger a person is, the more likely they are to support marriage equality. Or to go the other way, the older a person is, the more likely they are to oppose marriage equality.
INCOME
Who knew that one of the factors at work in the marriage equality debate is income? But that's exactly what the Q poll tells us.
In the category of those making under $50,000, 42 percent said they support marriage equality while 51 percent said they oppose it. Support became stronger in the $50,000 to $100,000 population with 46 percent supporting marriage equality and 48 percent saying they opposed marriage equality.
The greatest support for marriage equality comes from those making over $100,000. A strong majority of these individuals - 59 percent - said they support marriage equality while only 34 percent said they opposed it.
The conclusion to draw from the poll is a clear one. The greater a person's income, the more likely they are to support marriage equality. The lower the person's income, the more likely they are to oppose marriage equality.
EDUCATION
The education of voters plays a big role in where they stand on certain issues and who they vote for, what party they support, among other things. This is a fact we have known for some time. You can tell a lot by a voter just based on one question: Do you have a college education (or more specifically, a college degree)?
The Q poll found that there was opposition to marriage equality among those without a college education. In this group, 52 percent of those surveyed said they opposed marriage equality and 41 percent said they supported it. Those numbers aren't bad, although they do reinforce the point about education and politics.
It should be no surprise that those with a college education supported marriage equality (59 percent) in huge numbers compared to those who opposed it (35 percent).
The more education a person has, the more likely they are to support marriage equality. Education has a huge impact on this and, I might argue, that the college experience opens your mind up to a diverse audience. On a personal level, I didn't have any friends among the LGBT community in high school (at least at the time). But in college, I encountered many people, including those who lived in a nearby room or went to the same classes as I did that were a part of the LGBT community.
CONCLUSION
I have made other conclusions pertinent to the individual subjects, but there is also one conclusion to draw from this poll that couldn't be made in the other areas. This issue is highly complicated. For progressives, we see this as a cut-and-dry issue. We should grant equality to everyone, not just a certain group and we should not let outside influences (i.e. religious leaders) tell us otherwise. I know that African Americans have opposed marriage equality efforts. How soon they have forgotten their own plight and their own efforts to gain equality. Religious leaders forget the beginnings of our country, when this nation was founded by a large group of those seeking religious freedom. If equality was important to them (and presumably still is), it should be important to us all. If we don't live by that guiding principle, we fail to live up to our founders who said in the Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
We must not forget those words. They are not reserved for one group over another. They are reserved for everyone who calls this country home and who deserve to be treated with the proper respect and afforded the same rights as everyone else.
The background is, there was a fundraiser last night for New York State Seantor Ruben Diaz. A Pentecostal minister, 
