His reasoning, which some gay rights advocates have challenged, is that New York should make a statement that it is committed to treating same-sex couples the same way it treats opposite-sex couples.

Can someone explain this to me?

One more domino, baby. YES!

Maine is turning the corner soon, I hope: a bill for same-sex marriage equality goes before our legislature this spring.

danf, I'm guessing that argument between the Governor and "some gayrights advocates" is based on the difference between "making a statement" and actually making legal progress. The full quote, including the previous sentence, emphasis mine:

Mr. Paterson has said in recent days that the State Legislature should move ahead now with the legislation regardless of whether it can muster enough votes. His reasoning, which some gay rights advocates have challenged, is that New York should make a statement that it is committed to treating same-sex couples the same way it treats opposite-sex couples.

Some advocates probably think it advantageous to hold off until the movement has adequate votes to pass the legislation, and think that introducing legislation without the promise of support is less productive.

That would be my best assessment of the quote, anyhow. I'm not politically savvy enough to guess which strategy would be most effective, though.

Oh got it. Pragmatism in the long run vs. doing it now and risking possible defeat, making it more difficult in the future.

Or having to move to Iowa.

That's how I'm parsing that paragraph, anyhow.

And of course, there's no indication there of how many advocates challenge the Gov.'s decision --- could be two, could be two thousand. It's hard to know whether that conflict is notable or if it's a throwaway line in a story.

That makes sense, Elsa. Thanks.

Good things happen when you don't share a border with Utah :\

geography fail. make that "too close to Utah".

Paterson is so unpopular right now this has the air of Illinois' Governor Ryan imposing a death-penalty moratorium when he was on the verge of federal indictment for allowing campaign workers to hand out commercial drivers licenses in exchange for campaign donations, which in one case led to a driver losing a load on the highway, which then killed a number of children in a van which hit it.

In other words, Paterson is searching for a little personal dignity amid political strife.

Two governors later, the moratorium stands. I hope the same fate holds for New York.

stilicho, perhaps, but this is an issue he's been very vocal on for years. It's not something he's pulling from thin air for good press- he's said from day one it would be one of his goals. If he'd never mentioned it I'd be more suspicious. I actually figured we'd never see him make any movement towards equality since it could be bad press among people who already can't stand him (right leaning dems, and the right in general)

The problem is the so called "Gang of Three." With the Democrats controlling the senate by a slim majority (32-30) and Ruben Diaz, Sr., of the Bronx vehemently opposed to gay marriage, this unholy trinity has been threatening to compromise the Democrats' majority since November. Having got the deal they wanted, you'd think they'd have settled down by now, but Ruben Diaz's opposition to any legislation on gay marriage was explicitly part of the agreement. This is why Paterson's not sure the votes are there, and this is why some parts of the gay community in NY are worried about pushing the issue now.
Oh, and while I don't doubt Paterson's commitment to gay marriage,the NYT reported that he was actually present in the room when the Gang of Three came to its original agreement about the price of its loyalty to the Democrats.