State Sen. Savino Gets Noticed For Impassioned Gay Marriage Speech

After seeing what a mockery the massive bunch of closeted elderly fags in the Republican party have made of the "institution" of marriage - they might stop blowing men in public bathrooms behind their wives backs and hop off the hypocrite train. Eventually you're going to get caught. And yes, we're looking at you Eric Cantor.

That was an excellent speech and all obvious boobie jokes aside, she is seriously smart. Toss Sarah Palin in the nearest dumpster and get Diane Savino on the national stage. We need more women like her out there to set the example.

I hope she is on Rachel's show very soon and follows up on this.

I don't get it! Men with women and Women with men! This is not hard! God created Adam and Eve! The End!

I like her. Hot Italian mama.

Looks hot for 40.

Its so funny that this state is so freakishly stuck up and can not step into the modern world.. from Mass transit to Marriage NY state is falling behind... SAD SAD SAD

it's ok. Gay people pay less taxes than us 'normals' right? I mean, that seems fair then, since they are not allowed to have the same rights but they don't pay as much. so what's the problem?

Don't gays pay property taxes to send children from married straight families to school?

I'm not gay but that does seem hypocritical and in the face of our founding principles. Taxation without representation.

If gays can't get married, then they won't have kids or any use for public schools. I'm not having kids so I guess I'll sign up to claim "gay" on my 1040 filing next year.

Her speech was great, it was one of the few I watched, but it stuck with me.

The government needs to get out of the marriage business. If "only" civil unions are good enough for gays, they should be good enough for everyone else. Gays and straights alike should go to city hall to get their civil union licenses. If couples then want to get married, then by all means they should proceed to the church of their choice to have that sacrament performed.

The solution isn't to up-end anyone's definition of marriage, whatever it may be. The solution is to get the government out of the church-y business of marriage and restrict itself to the civil and legal business of recognizing personal contracts.

Marriage belongs in churches, on beaches, in backyards, and in drive-thru windows presided over by Elvis impersonators. Civil unions should be the legal domain of government, and that's where the government's involvement should end--for everyone.

Sooo on the mark. I love this speech.

And so unlike the silent, nay-saying, ugly, two-faced, misanthropic, mass-transit hating, perpetually sabotaging, self-purported financial wizard, and member of The Four Pendejos...er Amigos named Carl Kruger who represents my district. Unlike your colleague, you sir are completely disposable.

This state senator is an attractive woman who makes a very good argument here. I'm sure she will find a suitable man.

But to address the issue at hand, government has no business marrying people and should not be in the marriage business. Couples should file their contracts no matter who they are. It's not the government's business to marry someone or define what a marriage is. Register your legal agreement with your local county clerk and be done with it. The government has no business telling consenting adults of any persuasion if their union is up to spec.

Yeah, but don't take her to church for communion.

Part of Savino's district includes Borough Park, so the pro-gay speech may cost her the black-hat votes come reelection.

i don't care who she is. she's right, and that was more eloquent than anything i've heard on the matter yet.

What a nice speech. It made me cry! Thank you so much.

Savino For US Senate!

Don't worry, my gay friends. While our esteemed politicians are arguing over you should be allowed to get married, the state will go bankrupt and you'll be able to start a new pro-gay government from scratch!

I support gay marriage, but expending this huge amount of effort and political capital on an issue that benefits

In reply to your comment about whether or not it is a worthy goal to expend such large amounts of energy on an issue that will only really effect 5% (or 10%)of the population...

Isn't the who broo ha ha of health reform primarily fueled by a desire to insure the currently uninsured who represent approximately 4% of the US population? The US government is getting ready to spend $1 trillion based on a need of this 4% of people. How much is gay marriage going to cost them?!? States that have gay marriage show that is actually generates money. There is no rational argument against it. This man-and-a-woman BS is purely emotional. Marriage should be between two PEOPLE who fulfill the requirements set out by law (i.e. they are of age and not your immediate relative). Just like everything else in the world today, gender has nothing to do with it.?

Sorry that should say "less than 5% of the population while the remainder of the state is on the verge of starving...is ludicrous to me."

(I tried using the "less than" sign but the commenting system probably thought I was trying to use html and ate it.)

Also, I post in the nude, no cardigans.

But don't you see how stupid that argument is? When someone is being discriminated against we all lose. Also, FYI, it's more like 10% of the population. We didn't say in the 60s, "well, black people are a minority, so we shouldn't be spending any time worrying about their rights. Don't we have more important things to worry about? Like, things that affect white people?" Because the truth is we don't. Hatred and bigotry affects us all. Right now the government is endorsing that bigotry by actively discriminating against gay people. The thought that the elderly gay couple I know can't visit each other in the hospital - it's horrible. They've been together 30 years and nobody will give them the right to acknowledge each other as family. Savino's best point is that it's not the government's job to decide who contracts with who, just to administer the contract.

Though this is the state senate we're talking about, the state would probably be better off if the whole city of Albany suddenly vanished off the face of the planet. What would they do about the state's problems if they weren't arguing about gay marriage? Nothin, that's what.

Doh! Of course, that was in response to longacre.

Arguing that trying to broaden civil rights to everyone is only for "5%" of the population (and Kinsey would say 10%) is like arguing that the civil rights mov't of the 60s was only for that 10 - 12% of the population that was black. In fact, it benefits every New Yorker to have the promise of liberty and justice for all apply to all. It's that whole "America" thing. You would have made an impassioned defense of discriminated-against minorities in Germany 70 years ago too, I bet.

I believe longacre just expired.

heheh-on the floor under the computer in an old cardigan with nitro pills scattered across the floor and a pomeranian doing stress laps around him whimpering softly...

Well played.

I can almost imagine the stink 3 weeks from now when the decomposing body is finally found.

One of the beautiful things about Senator Savino's speech was her choice of words. She spoke about government "administering" marriage, which is exactly what it does. Government should not pass judgment on a marriage, it should simply administer the legality of the agreement.

id hit it

She did a great job of giving a reasonable explanation of the issue. Great job! I actually had a friend in Canada call me about her speech, apparently it's getting a lot of media play outside the US.

I'll be your boyfriend, Diane.

I'd hit it.

Good for her, & for everybody who voted Yes. My representative did; I wrote her to thank her, just like I wrote the "nays" to tell them that they should be embarassed to be the ones standing in the way of equality. Enjoy being the Bad Guys (tm), jerks.

Ooh, that was good!

IAWTAP

You must be new here.

For all the right religious people that believe a man and woman marriage is the only "god" given union, fine. Now go fuck yourself and your superstitious beliefs and voodoo concept of reality.

A true marriage is a union of two people that love and believe in each other. If that relationship lasts two days or for the rest of their lives so be it. It's a lot better and truer relationship than what I see in the news day after day with "dancing with the stars" as illustrated by our local papers.