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]
To comply with the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution, the State must provide to committed same-sex couples, on equal terms, the full rights and benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. The State can fulfill that constitutional requirement in one of two ways. It can either amend the marriage statutes to include same-sex couples or enact a parallel statutory structure by another name, in which same-sex couples would not only enjoy the rights and benefits, but also bear the burdens and obligations of civil marriage. If the State proceeds with a parallel scheme, it cannot make entry into a same-sex civil union any more difficult than it is for heterosexual couples to enter the state of marriage. It may, however, regulate that scheme similarly to marriage and, for instance, restrict civil unions based on age and consanguinity and prohibit polygamous relationships.
The constitutional relief that we give to plaintiffs cannot be effectuated immediately or by this Court alone. The implementation of this constitutional mandate will require the cooperation of the Legislature. To bring the State into compliance with Article I, Paragraph 1 so that plaintiffs can exercise their full constitutional rights, the Legislature must either amend the marriage statutes or enact an appropriate statutory structure within 180 days of the date of this decision.
For the reasons explained, we affirm in part and modify in part the judgment of the Appellate Division.
JUSTICES LaVECCHIA, WALLACE, and RIVERA-SOTO join in JUSTICE ALBIN’s opinion. CHIEF JUSTICE PORITZ filed a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part in which JUSTICES LONG and ZAZZALI join.
so it sounds as if any civil union law the legislature passed, that didn't have EVERY SINGLE RIGHT that a traditional marriage would - is unconstitutional by this standard.
so this decision really is simply gay marriage in disguise. for example, if the legislature passed a civil union law that offered up a few things - health care proxy rights, wills and estate rights, etc - to gay partners - but only those and no others - the NJ supreme court would find it unconstitutional.
so effectively, NJ has gay marriage now.
there is no way to stop the judiciary, other then by electing governors who replace the justices with conservative ones.
You are absolutely right about that. Get government out of the marriage business altogether. Government can only weaken and destroy marriage, never protect it.
ping!
by ruling that the current law that denies these rights and gay unions - is unconstitutional. that's how it starts.
If they voted on an amendment to ban gay marriage, it would pass, like in every one of the 50 states.
hetero marriage bump
Nope. Read it again. The court REQUIRES the legislators to enact a gay marriage or gay civil unions law that gives homosexuals the same rights that married couples have.
This is another huge victory for the homosexual agenda.
"Alicia Toby and Saundra Heath, who reside in Newark, have lived together for seventeen years and have children and grandchildren. Alicia is an ordained minister in a church where her pastoral duties include coordinating her church’s HIV prevention program. Saundra works as a dispatcher for Federal Express.
Mark Lewis and Dennis Winslow reside in Union City and have been together for fourteen years. They both are pastors in the Episcopal Church. In their ministerial capacities, they have officiated at numerous weddings and signed marriage certificates, though their own relationship cannot be similarly sanctified under New Jersey law. When Dennis’s father was suffering from a serious long-term illness, Mark helped care for him in their home as would a devoted son-in-law."
God help us all.
who?
=)
you are giving up a little too quickly here.
what is the process for amending the state constitution in NJ?
Does it really matter what they call it?
correct, that's the way it reads.
I have no idea.
The same they say about everything else, nothing.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
Back in September of 2000 during a meeting in support of the President's initial campaign I suggested exactly that to a group of New Jersey Republicans. Complete silence. There is no difference between the parties in this state. None whatsoever. A large part of the problem is that these RINOs look at the leftists as colleagues, not as the enemy.
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.