RECENT  POSTS:  » Jodie Foster in 2013: 'I am'; Jodie Foster in 2014: 'I do' » AFA promotes its new app in only way it knows how » Robert Oscar Lopez says I perform 'psychological operations routine' on him when I quote his own words from his own web site » Matt Barber's ever-classy site suggests gay people are literally crushing fellow humans » Bryan Fischer is on to our comic book villain–in-chief » Southern Baptist Theological Seminary's Al Mohler 'can't give' us acceptance; good thing we're not asking » NOM fails to trip up Oregon marriage case » Audio: Tony Perkins equates opposing equality with opposing Nazis » 'WaPo' conservative columnist: 'Strident' marriage equality opponents have lost » If you feel like you hear about another marriage case every day, here's why  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

10/18/2013

Shorter NOM: We know we've lost Jersey

by Jeremy Hooper

Those pesky "activist judges" and their learned application of law:

Screen Shot 2013-10-18 At 5.32.53 Pm"It is extremely disappointing that the New Jersey Supreme Court has allowed the ruling of an activist judge to stand pending its appeal through the court system. The definition of marriage is something that should be decided by the people of New Jersey themselves, not by any judge or court. New Jerseyans should have the right to vote on this issue just as voters in nearly three dozen other states have done. In addition, the decision to allow same-sex ‘marriage’ to proceed even while the law is being tested in court is unfair both to the voters of the state and to same-sex couples themselves. If the state Supreme Court were to uphold marriage as they should do, then the validity of the ‘marriages’ that will be performed starting next week will be called into question. Further, the decision opens the door to a possible federal court ruling similar to what occurred in California in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal which held that once a state grants same-sex ‘marriage’ rights it can never take them away. All in all, today’s ruling is another sad chapter in watching our courts usurp the rights of voters to determine issues like this for themselves."
National Organization For Marriage president Brian Brown

He's got nothing. Even if there were to be a vote, New Jerseyans support marriage equality in sizable numbers. It's highly likely that Brian's theoretical referendum—which should never happen regardless, as minority civil rights should not be popularity contests—would go the way the four states where marriage equality prevailed in November 2012.

NOM is losing in every arena, in every way. That's what happens when you choose the losing position. I tried to tell Brian years ago (way back when he was losing in Connecticut), but he just wouldn't listen.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails