The main stream media is trying to spin this as best they can, but in reality, the activist judges in New Jersey have decided that gay marriage or civil unions will move forward, whether or not the people approve or disapprove of this action.
The legislature in New Jersey were given two choices today, either they approve gay marriages or they approve civil unions. Period.
Breitbart-
New Jersey's highest court ruled Wednesday that gay couples are entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals, but that lawmakers must determine whether the state will honor gay marriage or some other form of civil union.
Advocates on both sides of the issue believed the state posed best chance for gay marriage to win approval since Massachusetts became the only state to do so in 2003 because the New Jersey Supreme Court has a history of extending civil rights protections.
Instead, the high court stopped short of fully approving gay marriage and gave lawmakers 180 days to rewrite marriage laws to either include gay couples or create new civil unions.
The people of New Jersey were never given the chance to voice their opinion on this issue. Instead, the activist judges made the decision for the people.
It is activist judges just like this that are telling me how to define marriage that I want to stop.
I will be voting "YES" on November 7th in order to protect the institution of marriage that is defined by God, not by activist judges.
4 comments:
The New Jersey Supreme Court fulfilled its obligations to review the constitutionality of the marriage laws of the state in preventing otherwise competent, consenting ADULTS to marry. It ruled that the laws violated the rights of its citizens and ordered the legislature either to correct the current law or set up a method(ie civil unions) which end the discrimination.
The NJ High Court did nothing more than serve the purpose for which it was created. It is no different that the US Supreme Court decisions in Brown v the Board of Education, Loving v Virginia, Miranda v California and many other cases.
You say you want Activist Judges to stop defining marriage. Even if the vote is Yes next month, litigation and a decision by the US Supreme Court can trump any state constitution.
Also, why are you afraid to let consenting adults (please spare us all the talk of marrying goats and kids)have the ability, to exercise their right, to marry the consenting adult of their choice? I can understand the sectarian religious views but we are not a theocracy. We are a secular society which acknowledges God or can choose not to acknowledge a God. Give your best legal argument as to why you are going to vote YES.
This NJ activitest judge BS is exacetly why we need to vote YES on the admentment.
The misleading tv ads are just that. Nothing will change???? if you vote no. BULL
We need to vote YES because otherwise people will be allowed to exercise their legal rights and marry the person of their choice?
We need to vote YES because otherwise people will be allowed to exercise their legal rights and marry the person of their choice?
Post a Comment