Posted on 10/25/2006 12:10:14 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
Edited on 10/25/2006 12:51:39 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
bttt
Denying committed same-sex couples the financial and social benefits and privileges given to their married heterosexual counterparts bears no substantial relationship to a legitimate governmental purpose. The Court holds that under the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution, committed samesex couples must be afforded on equal terms the same rights and benefits by opposite-sex couples under the civil marriage statutes. The name to be given to the statutory scheme that provides full rights and benefits to samesex couples, whether marriage or some other term, is a matter left to the democratic process.
No surprise there. We'll see what the good citizens of NJ have to say about this.
that'll help galvanize the conservative voters
its a real " statutory scheme " alright
Welcome to Bendover Acres.
All we need now is Rita Cosby to translate the opinion - any number of ways. ;-)
Massachusetts has become the number one state to which gay foreignors travel on tourist visas. I've heard they meet an American gay, marry him or her and become a legal permanent resident of the state
Interesting.
Any idea how much this will affect the Kean/Menendez race?
Let's just say I think Foley won't be on the news tonight ...
There's a shock. The same leftist court that said Democrats could disregard New Jersey election law and replace the damaged Bob Torrecelli on the ballot in 2002.
This one is fortunate enough to be moving to the mountains of PA in a few months. I've lived in NJ for only 3 years, but I can't for the life of me figure out the politics in this state.
This is good news for Kean Jr. I see a backlash against the Dummies as a result of this being forced on NJ by the courts.
What say you FF?
It was a 4-3 decision. 4 judges ruled something not called marriage would be okay, as long as gays get the same benefits as heterosexuals. 3 judges thought it must be called marriage.
My reaction to these BS decisions is: How is it we didn't know our Constitution was intended to require gay marriage all these years? Obviously, it wasn't.
How generous of them to allow the legislature to call it what they want. I'm sick of living under a judicial oligarchy. And last I checked, I didn't get to vote for any of these bozos in black!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.