New York Assembly Says “Yes” To Gay Marriage: 89 To 52
Quotes Of Assembly
Members
Â
Â
Â
Four weeks after Governor Paterson announced plans to introduce a gay marriage bill in New York, it passed its first vote today. Since that day, when the governor called his state’s lack of gay marriage a “crisis of leadership,” many factions have weighed in. On one side, State Senator Ruben Diaz, who called for the governor’s resignation, and Archbishop Timothy Dolan, who promised an “active and present” battle. On the other side, several thousand activists who flooded the state capitol to support gay rights, many secular and sectarian groups, and the New York State populace itself, which is in support of the bill by a 53% to 39% margin.
The outcome of the gay marriage decision in New York is particularly important, as New York is the third most-populous state in the nation, and one of the most visible around the world.
Assemblyman Danny O’Donnell, who was widely credited with securing passage of the bill two years ago, is similarly credited today. Profiled on the front page of today’s New York Times, O’Donnell is portrayed as, “a tenacious, ingratiating, playful and sometimes prickly leader of the effort to pass the legislation.”
The next step for the bill is a vote in the Senate, which is far less likely to pass the bill. No vote date is set yet.
Some memorable statements from the Assembly:
Don Hikind: It makes me very happy to say that my position is the same as the president’s, that he is against gay marriage. […] My God says I can’t do this.
Joel Miller: I hope that I will be the first of many Republicans who stand and say I support this bill. Throughout the animal kingdom we see homosexual behavior. There was never an advantage to be gay. It’s not gay to be gay. No one knows the size of the gay community, but it includes our family… We all remember when clearly the earth was flat, the sun revolved around the earth, it had to be that way because religion told us.
Religion is just not supposed to tell government what to do. We look at what’s going on in Islamic countries and say that belongs in the 14th century, it’s got to stop. It’s got to stop here. Religion has been the cause of more death and hatred and suffering than any thing else.
This is America, there is no room for discrimination of any kind.
Joseph Lentol: What God wants me to do in my life and in politics is to try to treat everyone equally. The principle is, shall we treat everyone equally? (We say,) ‘We’re going to give you civil unions, that’s just like equal!’ Just have your civil union and it’ll be fine.’ It’s not fine. Tonight, I vote for “love one another.”
Deborah Glick: The history of marriage has been about property, alliances between powerful families, and ensuring where the property should go, and most assuredly about the subjugation of women. The notion that this is some major departure from eons of understanding is not exactly the way it is.
What we are dealing with here is the notion of the majority’s sense of being comfortable.
I have been a member of this house for 19 years, and I don’t have the same rights as you two. Am I supposed to be concerned about your level of comfort?
We are not new on the face of the earth. Every fight for civil rights in this country has moved in a certain trajectory. Those who have said that my civil rights should be held to a public plebiscite, that is not what the constitution is about.
Mark Weprin: So much of discrimination is based on ignorance. The march of history is coming.
Patricia Eddington: This is the last bastion of hateful oppression.
Perhaps one of the the most heart-felt speeches came from Frank Skartados, who represents the Poughkeepsie area of the state:
I was the last person to come into this chambers, and probably the first one to go. But I like it here. I recognize the possibilities that we can do something positive for our community, and the state of New York. I come from a district that is very much divided between two different communities. The liberal, inner-cities, and the conservative suburbs. Very much divided. But on this issue, they are very much united. They do not want me to vote for this legislation, but I will do so. I will do so because it is the right thing to do. Not in the eyes of God, but in the eyes of a man, a humble man, like me. So, even though I may be one-term assemblymen, I’m willing to take that chance. Because it is the right thing to do. In the words of Nelson Mandela, there comes a time when the world is called upon to be great. So, ladies and gentlemen, let your greatness shine and vote for this bill.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.
Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”
“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”
In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”
He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”
“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”
“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”
“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”
The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.
“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”
Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”
Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.
Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.
— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine) July 6, 2026
President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.
“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”
The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”
Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”
TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”
Critics blasted Trump.
“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.
One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”
Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”
The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”
Image via Reuters
President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.
According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.
Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”
“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”
Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”
Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.
Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.
The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.
“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.
The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.
“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”
Image via Reuters
Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation
Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs
One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won
Inside the Group Helping MAGA Voters Walk Away — And What Finally Pushed Them
