Despite yesterday’s events which saw the New York State Senate swing back to a Republican majority as two senators crossed party lines, new Senate President Pedro Espada Jr., still wants to bring gay marriage up for a vote. From the NY Times City Room:

“I am for same-sex marriage,” Mr. Espada said. “There will be no guarantees and no quid pro quos, I think there will be a vote of conscience of the senators. And with my partner in government, Senator Skelos, we have not discussed bringing it out to the floor. I’m expressing my own personal desire to see a full debate and decision on this matter.”

The Empire State Pride Agenda, a gay rights organization in New York is still hopeful that gay marriage will be voted on before the end of legislative session, regardless of which party is in power.

Gay marriage in New York may be a distant dream now as Democrats Pedro Espada Jr. of the Bronx and Hiram Monserrate of Queens have defected to the GOP, giving Republicans 32 seats and a majority in the Senate. The re-shuffling of leadership puts the future of same-sex marriage for New York in doubt. Many have speculated that Senator Ruben Diaz a vocal opponent to gay marriage would also switch parties if any gay marriage legislation came before the Senate, but not today. Diaz remains a Democrat for now.

From the NY Times:

It was a noisy and acrimonious scene on the floor of the Senate as Senator Thomas W. Libous, a Republican from Binghamton and the party’s deputy leader, shouted for a roll-call vote, while Democrats attempted to stall the vote by asking to adjourn the session.

All 30 Republicans stood with their hands raised, signaling a vote for a change in leadership. Mr. Espada and Mr. Monserrate joined them, each raising his hand. Republicans won the vote by a 32-to-30 margin. The Senate will now be governed under a new joint leadership structure, with Mr. Espada serving as the president pro tempore, and Senator Dean G. Skelos, of Long Island, as the new majority leader.

A spokesman for former Democratic Senate Majority leader Malcom Smith called the action an “illegal and unlawful attempt to gain control of the Senate and reverse the will of the people who voted for a Democratic majority.”

It is unclear at this time why Senators Espada Jr. and Monserrate defected to the GOP. Both men are currently under investigation by the authorities, Espada Jr. for not living in his own district, and Monserrate for felony assault charges.

A new Gallup poll shows conservatives and weekly churchgoers now in favor of allowing open gays and lesbians to serve in the military, up 12 and 11 points respectively  since 2004. From Gallup:

The finding that majorities of weekly churchgoers (60%), conservatives (58%), and Republicans (58%) now favor what essentially equates to repealing the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy implemented under President Clinton in 1993 is noteworthy for several reasons. First, the data show that these traditionally conservative groups are shifting on this issue, supporting it to a far greater extent than they support legalized gay marriage. Second, it suggests the political playing field may be softer on this issue, and President Barack Obama will be well-positioned to forge ahead with his campaign promise to end the military ban on openly gay service members with some support from more conservative segments of the population. To date, it is estimated that more than 12,500 servicemen and servicewomen have been discharged under the policy, including more than 200 since Obama took office.

The question Gallup asked was:

“Do you favor or oppose allowing openly gay men and lesbian women to serve in the military?”

I wonder if moving the word “open” to later in the question would have affected the outcome of the poll…

“Do you favor or oppose allowing gay men and lesbian women to serve “openly” in the military?”

Just curious… In the mind of a wingnut…would it make a difference? I suspect it might.

Important Note: If you are visiting from www.usimmigrationwoes.com, they are mistaken. This is not a religious blog, and we are in full support of UAFA. Click on the UAFA link at the top of the page and will find numerous posts supportive of UAFA.

The Uniting American Families Act (UAFA), which provides a path to citizenship for same-sex couples where one of the partners is not a legal resident, is coming under fire from religious groups saying the act threatens overall immigration reform and undermines traditional marriage

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council is urging constituents to call their senators and vote against the bill:

Yesterday, while I was on the Hill meeting with a handful of senators, I learned that FRC’s noise on the immigration bill, S. 424 [UAFA], is having a considerable impact. After your calls and emails started pouring in, one leader told me the legislation, which would give a special resident status to same-sex partners, had become an embarrassing “spectacle.” Although the bill is still active, finding support for it will be even tougher now that FRC has shined the light on its real objective: undermining marriage. If you haven’t contacted your senators, please chime in this week and urge them to vote “no” on the “Uniting American Families Act.”

Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, head of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference is also opposed to the measure. From Politco.com:

..he [Rev. Rodriguez] called the efforts to slip gay rights into the immigration debate a “slap in the face to those of us who have fought for years for immigration reform.”

Rodriguez, who has worked with evangelical churches to build support for a broader immigration bill that would expand visa laws, said that if the same-sex language stays in, it will “divide the very broad and strong coalition that we have built on behalf of comprehensive immigration reform.”

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has also indicated they will not support immigration reform if it contains language granting rights to same-sex couples, saying it “would erode the institution of marriage and family… a position that  is contrary to the very nature of marriage which pre-dates the church and the state.”

As noted by Senator Jeff Sessions during the UAFA hearings earlier this week, Focus on the Family, the Eagle Forum and Concerned Women for America are also opposed to the legislation. Well post their official statements as they become available.

Lou Dobbs on CNN report on those opposed to UAFA last week. Watch:

Currently the House version of UAFA has 105 co-sponsors, while the Senate version of the bill only has 19 co-sponsors.

Please contact your local Represenative and have them co-sponsor UAFA.

Important Note: If you are visiting from www.usimmigrationwoes.com, they are mistaken. This is not a religious blog, and we are in full support of UAFA. Click on the UAFA link at the top of the page and will find numerous posts supportive of UAFA.