« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
10/26/2006
Jersey, the morning after
So now that the Supreme Court has paved the way for legal same-sex marriage in the Garden State, the focus now turns to making sure the Legislature does the right thing and legalizes FULL marriage equality and not a "separate but equal" civil unions system. Unfortunately, in a statement issued yesterday, Senate President Richard J. Codey and Assembly Speaker Joseph J. Roberts Jr. (pic., from left) don't come out and indicate that they'll push for the full enchilada:
"Given the fact that it took the judicial system nearly four years to come up with a 4-3 split decision, we think the determination by only four justices that the entire Legislature is obligated to respond within 180 days is unreasonable.
"Nevertheless, our state constitution was interpreted today by the entire court to reinforce the principles of equal rights, equal protection and equal opportunity under the law.
"The importance of today's ruling is the declaration that the rights and benefits of same sex couples cannot be compromised.
"We are prepared to defend the constitutional rights of our citizens and will not support - nor will we post for a vote - any constitutional amendment that would overturn the Supreme Court's decision protecting same sex couples.
"The only remaining issues now confronting the Legislature are ones of terminology and clarification. The Legislature's course of action will be determined only after discussion by our respective caucuses."
Hmm...alright, so they're committed to our rights and benefits and won't support attempts to threaten those rights. But come on, fellas -- there is not one valid reason to set up separate channels through which we must swim in order to obtain those rights. If we have to even utter the words "civil union permit" rather than "marriage certificate," then that presents the idea to the world that...
However, the Codey/Roberts Jr. statement is more promising than the one Dem. Senator Raymond J. Lesniak (pic.) gave to the NY Times, wherein he presents his idea of why our equality should come under a different name and system:
“Marriage has been a religious institution adopted by the government and a lot of religions have defined it in a way that that excludes gays,” Mr. Lesniak said. “That’s not what the government does, and the court clearly demands that we offer gay couples the same rights and obligations that heterosexual couples have under our marriage laws. But we can do it in a way that respects people’s religious beliefs.”
But that's flawed logic, as the ruling deals with CIVIL MARRIAGE! Religious institutions will not be forced to perform or recognize these unions! Following this argument is kind of like setting rules for the ways hospitals perform circumcisions based on the way various religions interpret and perform the practice! Yes, religion has been incorporated into marriage ceremonies (and brises), but the institution of matrimony exists independent of those houses of worship! If it didn't, then a religious leader and a holy building would be marital requirements for everyone! But they are not. You cannot base your decision on folks whose beliefs, in actuality, do not have to be affected in any way, shape, or vow!
This decision is likely to get intense and even a little heated over the next 180 days. All we ask is that the Legislature and individual legislators stick to the true issues here and not delve into the rhetoric that has muddied this argument's waters for far too long. It is about equality. It is about fairness. It is about every couple that marries in the Garden State doing so on a level playing field. When your mind is freed of any other convictions or duplicitous arguments, it is clear to see that the only way to fully implement marital parity is by granting full marriage.
We beg of you: Do what's actually right, not what's inspired by religious right rhetoric.
CODEY, ROBERTS STATEMENT ON SUPREME COURT RULING UPHOLDING CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF SAME-SEX COUPLES [NJ Senate Dems]
Gay Marriage Backers Hope to Sway N.J. Lawmakers [NY Times]
Technorati Tags: gay marriage, New Jersey
comments powered by Disqus
