[Coleus]

N.J. Supreme Court Ruling Opening Door to Same-Sex Marriages, A Wake-Up Call

ANN ARBOR, MI – The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled yesterday that same-sex couples are entitled to all the rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite–sex couples. The Court ordered the state legislature to enact legislation within 180 days that would either include same-sex couples in the existing marriage laws, or create a parallel statutory structure. Gay activists hailed the Court’s decision as an enormous victory.  The ruling overturned two lower court decisions that had dismissed the complaint brought by seven same-sex couples, which alleged that state restrictions of marriage to the union of one man and one woman violated the liberty and equal protection guarantees of the state constitution. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex unions despite the fact that current state law defines marriage as between one man and one woman and despite the fact the court acknowledged there is no fundamental right to same –sex marriages.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, condemned the ruling, “The New Jersey Supreme Court has engaged in a reckless act of social engineering and judicial activism which, if allowed to stand, will have bitter consequences for society in the future. No consideration was given to the instability the Court’s social experimentation will have on society as they cavalierly detached marriage from procreation and the traditional family of one man and one woman. This decision should be a wake-up call to the vast majority of Americans who oppose same-sex marriages. Perhaps the chief lesson of yesterday’s decision is the importance of providing traditional marriage with constitutional protection.”   In 2004, the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, collaborated with the Coalition For The Protection Of Marriage and other pro-family groups, such as the American Family Association of Michigan, to draft and secure passage of Michigan’s Marriage Amendment. When opponents of the amendment claimed it was unnecessary because Michigan law limited marriage to the union of one man and one woman, the Center warned that a constitutional amendment was the best guarantee against a redefinition of marriage by an activist court.

Patrick T. Gillen, the Thomas More Law Center attorney who drafted Michigan’s Marriage Amendment for the Coalition, noted another lesson to be learned from the decision. “The defense of traditional marriage was fatally compromised by the Attorney General’s failure to defend the role that marriage plays in promoting the true good of the spouses and children who enter the family. Once society fails to appreciate these essential goods of marriage, damage to the family and, ultimately, the common good, becomes inevitable.”  Last week Gillen appeared before the Michigan Supreme Court in a case where the Law Center argues that Michigan’s Marriage Amendment prohibits public schools from recognizing and subsidizing same-sex domestic partnerships. Yesterday, the Law Center filed an appeal from a decision dismissing its claim that the Marriage Amendment prohibits Michigan State University from recognizing and subsidizing same-sex domestic partnership benefits. In both cases the courts refused to rule on the merits of the claim, dismissing the suits based on narrow jurisdictional grounds.

Currently, Massachusetts is the only state that has authorized same-sex marriages. Two other states, Vermont and Connecticut authorize civil unions. Nineteen states have adopted constitutional amendments that explicitly ban same-sex marriages. On November 7th eight additional states will be voting on constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriages -- Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin.

[ken5050]

FYI..NYC Mayor Bloomberg has already announced that he supports the NJ decision, and that "New York City will recognize those gay marriages from NJ when and if they occur." The problem is that it's the STATE, and not the CITY, that determines what will, or not be recognized from another state..

The person who, IMHO, will really be hurt by this is Rudy. I've long felt he has a good chance for the 2008 GOP nomination, and that he could become acceptable to social conservatives and evangelicals in the GOP because of his strong stance on national security issues, but if Rudy is forced to take a position on this issue, and agrees with Bloomberg..then he's toast...so there may be a political implication at play here..

[Alberta's Child]

"The defense of traditional marriage was fatally compromised by the Attorney General’s failure to defend the role that marriage plays in promoting the true good of the spouses and children who enter the family."

I strongly disagree with this guy. The defense of traditional marriage was fatally compromised once governments got into the business of giving out marriage licenses in the first place. The best defense against same-sex marriage is to shake the dust off our feet and stop pretending that a government's definition of "marriage" means -- or ever did mean -- anything at all.

I can easily see the day when people with serious religious inclinations simply stop getting "licenses" when they get married.

[KC_Conspirator]

Eff yah! Its the gift that keeps in giving. democrats and liberals secretly want to shove this down America's throat and most everybody does not want it.

[Neoliberalnot]

If NJ wasn't so close-minded, interspecies marriage should also be on the ballot. See article in Bay City Times. The Will and Trigger show is just around the corner.

The Bay City Times ^ | Tuesday, October 24, 2006 | TIM YOUNKMAN
(mlive.com) A 44-year-old Saginaw man remains jailed today on charges of bestiality after he was seen engaged in sexual acts with a dead dog, Michigan State Police troopers said. Ronald Kuch was arrested after police searched the area of Midland and...

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Does anyone know precisely what this adds in terms of benefits to the already existing domestic partner benefits? What did they gain in real goods?

The idea that a title makes a difference is ridiculous. Even a domestic partnership is essentially a marriage. All the domestic partner law did was make it easier for the judges to claim discrimination because the "union" benefits were not the same.

[little jeremiah]

Any time you (or anyone) posts a Stanley Kurtz article, it would be good to add his name to the keywords. Thanks for posting this.

Self: later pingout.

[CaptRon]

I guess none of these commentators see a problem with the New Jersey Supreme Court telling the NJ Legislature what laws they must pass and giving them a deadline to do it! At least I haven't seen it discussed.

[shield]

Activist Judges over rule the will of the people. If congress doesn't do something with these type of judges i.e. state and federal well....then we've brought what will happen on ourselves.......

[SauronOfMordor]

The Court ordered the state legislature to enact legislation within 180 days that would either include same-sex couples in the existing marriage laws, or create a parallel statutory structure.

The purpose of the court ruling is to grant cover to the legislature to legalize same-sex marriage, and claim "We had no choice -- it was a court order!"

The court can strike down legislation that violates the state constitution, but it has no authority to order the legislature to pass legislation.

[Rosemont]

Judges are so important.