|Ishtar Gate of Babylon|
I was troubled as I lay on my bed, and my thoughts welled up in my heart, because I saw the desolation of Zion and the wealth of those who lived in Babylon.According to the New York Times "a group of super-rich Republican donors" was the deciding factor behind the redefinition of marriage in NY.
– 2 Esdras 3:1-2
In the 35th-floor conference room of a Manhattan high-rise, two of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s most trusted advisers held a secret meeting a few weeks ago with a group of super-rich Republican donors."Insulate" is a word usually used in reference to cozy blankets and warm jackets. Here it has a much more sinister connotation. The implication is that the votes from Republicans to support "homosexual marriage" were bought off!
Would the donors win over the deciding Senate Republicans? It sounded improbable: top Republican moneymen helping a Democratic rival with one of his biggest legislative goals.
But the [Republican] donors in the room — the billionaire Paul Singer, whose son is gay, joined by the hedge fund managers Cliff Asness and Daniel Loeb — had the influence and the money to insulate nervous senators from conservative backlash if they supported the marriage measure.
The Wall Street Journal comes to the same conclusion. Out of state, super-rich gay rights activists "turned the tide" in the campaign to redefine marriage.
Ultimately, Republican concerns were outweighed by pressure from Mr. Cuomo, who lent his muscle to a disciplined, multimillion dollar advocacy campaign waged by national and local gay-rights leaders.The WSJ says the Republican state senators were "wooed". Again this is a strange use of a word totally out of context. Normally wooing is used to describe the romantic courtship of young lovers. Here again there is a much more sinister connotation. And again the only honest conclusion that one can come to is that the WSJ is implying that the senators were bought off!
A pivotal factor was a less obvious break in strategy, which for years had been anchored by the assumption that New York would never legalize gay marriage as long as Republicans controlled the Senate.
Instead of trying to defeat Senate Republicans and prop up their adversaries, gay-rights activists wooed the them with a blend of courtship and threats that gradually wore down their resistance to a bill and opened the door for a winning vote.
The new plan was spearheaded by the Gill Action Fund, a powerful gay-rights group led by Tim Gill, a libertarian-leaning philanthropist from Denver. Mr. Gill's team of operatives and network of donors helped turn the tide on gay marriage in other statehouses, including Iowa and New Hampshire.
Last year, Mr. Gill's group pumped in nearly $1 million into a political action committee called Fight Back NY, which financed attack ads against three vulnerable senators—Democrats Hiram Monserrate and Bill Stachowski and Republican Frank Padavan—who voted against the bill in 2009. They lost their seats to gay-marriage friendly candidates.
"We wanted to send a very strong and clear message about what happens when you double-cross us," said Mr. Gill's political director, Bill Smith.
Even Archbishop Timothy Dolan hints that there were some strange back-room dealings going on.
It’s very discouraging because the opposition is very well oiled, very well financed. They have all the elites behind them, whether it be the TV talk shows or radio or newspaper columnists. It’s a real David and Goliath battle.And yet at the end of all this extraordinarily financed lobbying campaign, State Senator Mark J. Grisanti (who is also a Catholic) has the nerve to stand up and say that his swing vote in favor of "homosexual marriage" was a matter of conscience. Never mind that he campaigned in favor of maintaining the accepted definition of marriage. Are we supposed to believe that the big bucks waved around in front of Grisanti's nose had no influence on his change of heart?
I know that the governor [Andrew Cuomo] — I mean he’s a shrewd politician, and I have to say that with a certain amount of envy and admiration — but you talk about twisting arms, you talk about using every political tool in the book; he’s doing it, and he’s doing it effectively.
They talk about us imposing our values on others. Who’s imposing on what? We have a set definition of marriage that has been part of the human endeavor from time immemorial. They’re imposing a radically new understanding of that upon something that has served as the bulwark of civilization for thousands and thousands of years.
I’m immensely grateful for the strong Catholic opposition. … When I will talk to legislators, they will say, “Archbishop, you need to know your people have been extraordinarily effective in bringing their voice to this, and it has not gone unnoticed in the state Capitol. One legislator said the Legislature got over 40,000 emails from Catholics protesting this. That is phenomenal. I think that is what has staved it off this long.
So, once again, it’s the sentiments of people of faith that seem to be trampled.
No wonder that gay political activists didn't want to have the people of New York state vote on the issue in a referendum. First, they knew they would lose according to opinion polls. Second, it costs a lot more money to try to shift the opinion of the whole population of New York than it does to "persuade" a few state senators.
"You get what you pay for." In this case gay activists have bought themselves a historic redefinition of marriage against the will of the people of New York.
The true danger in all this is that we may be fooled into thinking that this redefinition of marriage in New York indicates some sort of shift in public opinion with regards to marriage. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is not enough money in the world to make all Americans change their opinions on marriage, but if Americans can be convinced that there has been a shift in public sentiment in this area then the public's resolve against this gay activist campaign can be made to whither without a fight.
All we need to do to win this fight is to maintain our belief in the truth and to retain a sense of reality, and not be fooled by the illusory arguments of the opposition. If we are willing to stand up against this ghostly enemy it will disappear like a phantasm.