Gay couples file suit over New Jersey's refusal to grant them marriage licenses

nj.com ^ | 6/26/02

[knak]

NEWARK, N.J. (AP) -- A national gay rights group filed a lawsuit Wednesday on behalf of seven same-sex couples who have been denied marriage licenses in New Jersey.

The denials violate the state Constitution's equal protection clause by excluding the couples from benefits associated with legal marriage, including health insurance benefits and spousal inheritance rights, said lawyers for Lambda Legal, a national gay rights advocacy organization.

[knak]

This country is going down the drain. No pledge of alligiance, political correctness, open borders, no guns, reparations, and gays getting married. I just don't believe it!!!!

[A Ruckus of Dogs]

You shouldn't need government's "permission" to get married no matter who you are. It's not the government's job to be involved in people's personal lives.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

This is disgusting. And how much you want to bet they'll get a liberal judge who agrees them? The "silent majority" better start speaking up on these issues or this country is history.

[FreeTally]

You shouldn't need government's "permission" to get married no matter who you are. It's not the government's job to be involved in people's personal lives.

I agree, however, but the issue is complecated by the fact that "married" persons receieve government benefits. This is sort of one of those "two wrongs don't make a right" things.

Marriage should only be treated by the State as a legal contract. By doing this, it takes the government out of the "marriage business" while still showing the "community" that the two people have made a commitment, and each is "taken".

[knak]

benefits associated with legal marriage, including health insurance benefits and spousal inheritance rights,

guess that makes it governments business

[Aquinasfan]

This country is going down the drain. No pledge of alligiance, political correctness, open borders, no guns, reparations, and gays getting married. I just don't believe it!!!!

It's either God or anything goes. The road to hell is wide. We ain't seen nothin' yet.

[opticoax]

Do you promise to love, cherish, and violate his cornhole regularly?

Wonder if they're keeping the "in sickness and in health" part?

[Reaganwuzthebest]

It's not the government's job to be involved in people's personal lives.

You are correct to a degree, but society does have a right to a certain kind of standards it wants to live by. We don't allow bigamy either, even though that would be done by consenting adults. And we have laws against drugs because we don't want to legitimize behavior that is destructive and costly to others, not necessarily the user.

Gays can live together if they want, no one is stopping them. But allowing formal marriages would be the dumbing down of an institution meant for man and woman.

[roylene]

You're right, no one can prevent you from being married. The marriage license is an official document to legally recognize the marriage. And according to the federal government and most state governments, that legally recognize union is between one man and one woman

[A Ruckus of Dogs]

Gays can live together if they want, no one is stopping them. But allowing formal marriages would be the dumbing down of an institution meant for man and woman

The 50% divorce rate and the current level of shack-up jobs have done more to dumb down marriage than letting a miniscule percentage of same-sex couples to marry.

[ELS]

FYI

[Reaganwuzthebest]

The government can't do much about cohabitation, that goes for gays or heterosexuals. And I don't think it's their place to try and stop it. People have a right to their personal lives, on that you and I agree.

But society believes marriage is for the purpose of promoting the traditional family, no matter the divorce rate. It's not meant for a man to have nine wives, or for gays, or for illegal immigrants to use it fraudulently as a way to remain in this country. I think it should stay that way.

[dpa5923]

The "silent majority" better start speaking up on these issues or this country is history.

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but this country is on it's downward spiral. I think we should all prepare for the long winter that is sure to come after this fall.

[steve-b]

No pledge of alligiance, political correctness, open borders, no guns, reparations, and gays getting married.

You forgot "cats and dogs living together".

[Coleus]

WASHINGTON, DC - The Alliance for Marriage issued a statement today calling attention to the filing of another gay activist lawsuit to destroy the legal status of marriage as evidence of the need for the Federal Marriage Amendment.  Last month, in response to the accelerating national legal strategy of gay activist groups, the Alliance for Marriage introduced the Federal Marriage Amendment in the House of Representatives with bi-partisan support.

Matt Daniels, Executive Director of the Alliance for Marriage, said: "Gays and lesbians have a right to live as they choose.  But they don't have a right to redefine marriage for our entire society."  Daniels said that the Alliance for Marriage introduced the Federal Marriage Amendment in Congress because, "Our nation cannot go forward unless our laws send a positive message to our children about marriage, family and their future."

What Does the Federal Marriage Amendment Do?

The Federal Marriage Amendment says two things:  Marriage in America is the union of male and female, and let the people of the states -- not the courts -- decide all issues related to marital benefits through the democratic process.

Why Are Current Legal Defenses for Marriage Insufficient?

The federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) cannot prevent activist groups from overcoming public opinion and undermining marriage laws through state court lawsuits -- like the suit filed today in New Jersey.  Other examples include activist lawsuits filed in MA and VT.  Moreover, most legal experts agree that neither state marriage laws nor the federal Defense of Marriage Act are likely to survive constitutional challenges in court.

Why Is a Constitutional Amendment Needed to Protect the Legal Status of Marriage?

The entire effort to undermine the legal status of marriage in the courts is premised upon constitutional law. Activist groups plan to use the Equal Protection and Full Faith and Credit clauses of the United States Constitution to export same-sex "marriage" around the country.  The only question is whether the legal status of marriage will be determined by un-elected judges or the American people. 

Additional information is available online: www.allianceformarriage.org

[Coleus]

It all starts in the schools

The kids are indoctrinated and brainwashed to accept deviant behavior. This is one small example:

Author Admits Gay Propaganda in Kids' Book

[Reaganwuzthebest]

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but this country is on it's downward spiral.

Certainly hope you're wrong, but things aren't looking good when you read stories like this.

[bioprof]

Another reason, besides the liberal court, that this is to be filed in NJ is the underwhelming interest the citizens of this state have for anything that doesn't hit them over the head directly. The apathy in this state is unbelievable.

[Sweet_Sunflower29]

mar·riage n.

1. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
2. The state of being married; wedlock.
3. A common-law marriage.
4. A wedding.
5. A close union: “the most successful marriage of beauty and blood in mainstream comics” (Lloyd Rose).

Just wait though, and give it time. If this becomes an acceptable practice, what to stop a different perversion based group from rallying for the right to marry a child, a dog or a tree?

Disgusted.

[firebrand]

Just ponder for a moment how enormously the legal institution of marriage differs from the Catholic version. The concept of marriage has already been grayed and fuzzied beyond anything I was ever taught. This is just one more nail in its coffin.