Like Senator Adams, I've spoken on this floor many times myself and I've never been quite as nervous. Not because I'm not sure of my position or how I feel or what I think is the right thing to do. Because I'm not sure what's going to happen - and that's rare for the New York State senate. Rarely do we not know the outcome of bills before they come to the floor. And rarely have we faced an issue as important as this without knowing the outcome. Tens of thousands of New Yorkers' lives are hanging in the balance in this debate. They're either going to go home today knowing that we made history here in New York State, or they're going to go home incredibly disappointed - but certainly unbowed, and the struggle will continue. But I hope that we are going to make that history here today. I hope that we are going to take that step forward to continue the promise of Thomas Jefferson that Senator Schneiderman so eloquently talked about, or eradicate the inequality that Senator Adams described so painfully. I hope that we're going to make that choice because I reject - even though I have great respect for Senator Diaz, and I do, he's not here but I do have great respect for him - and I have great respect for his religious convictions. But this vote is not about politics. It's not about Democratic politics or Republican politics. It's not about who contributed to what campaign. It's not about who tried to make this body one party or another. It has absolutely nothing to do with this. This vote is about an issue of fairness. Inequality. Not political.

It is about the fairness of people who are of the right age, of sound mind, who choose to live together, share everything together, and want to be able to have the protection that government grants those of us who have the privilege of marriage and treat it so cavalierly in our society. That's all this is about. Whether Senator Duaine and his partner Lewis, who are two of the most committed people I've ever met - I will tell you, I'm over the age of 40, and that's all you're going to get from me, but I have never been able to maintain a relationship of the length or the quality that Tom Dwayne and Lewis has. Why should they be denied the right to share their life together? I don't know Senator O'Donnel's partner, but I know he is as committed to him as Tom is to Louis, and my friend Matt Tutone is to his partner, Josh. These are relationships that I envy, and in fact we all should envy. And all they ask for is that they be treated fairly and equally, and be able to plan for each other in the event something happens to them the same way Senator Lancet does with his wife Marcele, or Senator Flanagan does with his wife, or any of those of us here who are married are able to plan to protect the person that we love.

You know I've also been lobbied, quite interestingly, on this bill by people on both sides. I'll tell you one funny story. I was on 6th avenue in Manhattan, I was in my car, I was driving, make a left turn onto 52nd street, I was stopped at a light, I had my window open. And a young man on a pedicab stopped and stuck his head in the window of my car, which I thought was kind of strange. But he recognized the senate license plate on my car and this was right during the week that the assembly was taking up the vote earlier this year. And he said to me, Excuse me, is there going to be a gay marriage vote in Albany this week? And I said Yes, the assembly's going to take it up, but the senate probably won't take it up any time soon, I'm not sure when. And he said, Are you going to vote for it? and I said Yes I am, and he said, Why. And I said Because I believe that people should be able to share their life with whomever they want and the role of government is to administer that contract that they agree to enter into. And he stopped and said, But they're changing the definition of marriage. And I said, Don't get so excited about this marriage stuff. I said, Think about this, we just met, you and I right here at the stoplight. You stuck your head in the window of my car. Do you know tomorrow we could go to City Hall, we could apply for a marriage license, and we could get married, and nobody there will ask us about the quality of our relationship or whether we've been committed to each other or any of those things. They will issue that marriage license and we can get married. And he said, Yes, that's true. I said, Do you think we're ready for that kind of commitment? And he stopped and he said, I see your point.

And that's really what this is about. We in government don't determine the quality or the validity of peoples' relationships. If we did we would not issue three-quarters of the marriage licenses we do. And I know there are many people in the religious community who feel that we're going to force this on them when that in fact is not true we have never done that. I'm a Roman Catholic. The Catholic church has the right to deny me the sacrament of marriage if they determine the person I choose to marry is unfit or our relationship doesn't meet their standards. City Hall does not have that right. That will not change under this bill. That will never change. Religious institutions can continue to practice discrimination with respect to the sacrament of marriage. We don't. We shouldn't. We should not do it for gay and lesbian couples.

I know many people are concerned about the destruction of the sanctity of marriage, as well, and they view this as a threat. But let me as you something, ladies and gentlemen, what are we really protecting when you look at the divorce rate in our society? Turn on the television. We have a wedding channel on cable TV devoted to the behavior of people on their way to the altar. They spend billions of dollars, behave in the most appalling way, all in an effort to be princess for a day. You don't have cable television? Put on network TV. We're giving away husbands on a game show. You can watch 'The Batchelor,' where 30 desperate women will compete to marry a 40-year-old man who has never been able to maintain a decent relationship in his life. We have 'The Bacholorette,' in reverse. And my favorite show, which thank God only ran one season because it was truly distasteful, was 'The Littlest Groom,' where 30 desperate women competed to marry a dwarf. That's what we've done to marriage in America, where young women are socialized from the time they're five years old to think of being nothing but a bride. They plan every day what they'll wear, how they'll look, the invitations, the whole bit. They don't spend five minutes thinking about what it means to be a wife. People stand up there before God and man - even in Senator Diaz's church - they swear to love, honor, and obey; they don't mean a word of it. So if there's anything wrong, any threat to the sanctity of marriage in America, it comes from those of us who have the privilege and the right, and we have abused it for decades.

We have nothing to fear from Tom Duaine and Louis. We have nothing to fear from Danny O'Donnel and his partner. We have nothing to fear from people who are committed to each other who want to share their lives and protect one another in the event of sickness, illness, or death. We have nothing to fear from love and commitment. My only hope, Tom, is that we pass this bill, the governor signs it, and then we can learn from you, and you don't learn from us. I vote aye.