Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Yay New Jersey!
The Other Side forums - suitable for mature readers! > The Other Side forums > The Issues Forum
pgrmdave
http://www.blogs.nj.com/newsupdates/slnews...asp?item=246306

http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=e...3ZxZWVFRXl5Mw==

The State Supreme court decided on Wednesday that gay and lesbian couples must have access to equal rights as heterosexual couples in a unanimous decision. They gave the legislature 180 days to pass laws to that effect, and to decide whether to call it a civil union or a marriage. They were actually split 3-4 on whether to mandate it be called marriage, or whether to leave that up to the elected officials.
PsychWardMike
Saw it. Glad to see it, too. Proud of me home (ish) state.

Seriously, it's the only way it could work outside of my idea of eliminating the word from marriage from the government entirely for heterosexuals and homosexuals thus negating the whole deal all together.

Actually, upon second thought I still agree with my idea, but at least this lends itself to equal rights, and that's a step in the right direction.
Mata
From a personal perspective, I don't mind the idea of something being legally referred to as a civil union instead of a marriage as long the rights given to the couple are the same. 'Marriage' to me implies a religious element, and I don't see a problem with anyone leaving this aspect out of their union if they chose to do so, but because I see it as a religious term I can see why people wouldn't want it applied to partnerships that are in contradiction to some of the religion's teachings.

As long as the rights applied are the same then the rest is just semantics and dogma.
Righteous
QUOTE (Mata @ Nov 1 2006, 04:44 AM) *
'Marriage' to me implies a religious element, and I don't see a problem with anyone leaving this aspect out of their union if they chose to do so, but because I see it as a religious term I can see why people wouldn't want it applied to partnerships that are in contradiction to some of the religion's teachings.

All that, my friend, is why I don't think governments should have straight marriages either, only civil unions. Marriages are, historically at least, about a loving union between two people under whatever god they worship. Were this the case, I'd put more faith in and empasis on marriages than civil unions since, in my eyes, marriage is holy (though not always treated as such) and civil unions are secular business arrangements.
Astarael
I'm proud of New Jersey; I'd say that I hoped my state would follow suit, but (unfortunately) I wouldn't bet on it happening any time in the next twenty years at least without major upheaval.
It doesn't matter what it's called if the government is administering it; hand out the same rights and the rest will sort itself out. The point about the connotations of civil unions and marriages is good. Civil unions are strictly secular, so calling equally secular unions with more rights that are based more on affections "marriage" throws the word out of balance. I think there's too much history behind that word to change it until gay marriage is legalized; then there'll probably be a push, especially from religious leaders, to invent new words to cover the new area.
Calantyr
With at least four US states with legislature openly gainst gay marriage, and more on the way, the New Jersey ruling is going to take a LONG time to reverse the current trend. Don't get me wrong, it's good news and long overdue but I seriously doubt it will have the impact many hope it will.
pgrmdave
Well, don't forget US Constitution, Article IV Section I:

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.


I believe that once this topic gets to the Supreme Court, especially with a constructionist court, that they will rule in favor of allowing couples to be married in one state and move to another with full benefits of marriage.
Calantyr
On a not unrelated note:

Rebulic of South Africa legalises same-sex unions and marriage

"From Facism to Freedom in 15 years" as it has been put on another forum. I'm incredibly suprised at how quickly this change has happenned.
sirdudly
The government taking any stand regarding marriage troubles me. At this rate, they're gonna be subsidizing love by 2015.
Xeno
I don't think the Full Faith and Credit Act will apply here. My guess is the New Jersey Legislature will call it a civil union to avoid antagonizing other states. Then other states can legitimately say that while the civil union is binding throughout the U.S. that their state provides no legal status to it. It is the equivalent of taking a motorcycle license into a state that bans motorcycles.

I hope they do it this way. If the gay rights movement really wants to spread gay marriage throughout the Union it's probably not a good idea to try to force it on the other states. I think it will create harsh feelings and slow the process. I live in Texas and I can tell you the nasty backlash that will fly if New Jersey tries to compel this state to accept gay marriage.
pgrmdave
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2726858

The legislature just approved the civil unions, and Governor Corzine will sign it into law.
FeralPolyglot
I'm glad that New Jersey is extending to same-sex couples the same rights that heterosexual couples have. I think that it's a definitive step in the right direction. As far as the term for the union, I think that once the hot-potato of Equal Marriage has calmed down, a term for this union shall be forged. People need to accept that it's Equal before tackling the task of getting the nomenclature right.
pgrmdave
I think people should just ignore the law's word and say they're married. Once it becomes normal, the law's wording won't matter as much.
trunks_girl26
QUOTE (pgrmdave @ Dec 18 2006, 05:22 PM) *
I think people should just ignore the law's word and say they're married. Once it becomes normal, the law's wording won't matter as much.


Most homosexual couples do, as far as I've seen. And most don't care what others call it, just that they have equal rights.

But yaaaaaaay NJ =)
PsychWardMike
I disagree with the decision to call it anything but marriage is unconstituional, going back to the whole "seperate but equal" deal. It's a step in the right direction, just like giving blacks their own schools was.

But I still maintain that the government has to get rid of the word "marriage" completely. It's not their place. It's the church's.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.