NJ Panel Recommends Same Sex Marriage Over Civil Union

[Darth Fanboy]

http://www.reuters.com/article/domestic ... KJ20081210

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - New Jersey should follow two other U.S. states and allow same-sex couples to marry rather than just enter into civil unions, as the law currently permits, a state commission recommended on Wednesday.

In a report that could lead to New Jersey legalizing gay marriage, the Civil Union Review Commission said same-sex couples cannot achieve equality with heterosexual couples if their legal status is restricted to civil unions.

Full marriage is the only way to meet a state constitutional requirement for equality, said the 13-member panel of public officials, clergy, lawyers and same-sex marriage advocates.

The panel was picked by the governor, other state officials and state agencies and charged with evaluating New Jersey's civil union law and making a recommendation. Its recommendation was unanimous.

"The Commission finds that the separate categorization established by the Civil Union Act invites and encourages unequal treatment of same-sex couples and their children," the panel said in a 79-page report based on an 18-month investigation.

Citing "overwhelming evidence," it said "civil unions will not be recognized by the general public as the equivalent of marriage in New Jersey."

New Jersey's state Supreme Court ruled in 2006 that same-sex couples are entitled to the same civil rights as heterosexual couples but declined to say whether a same-sex union should be called marriage.

The court handed the question to the state legislature which created the civil unions law in 2007.

The commission's report may now revive legislative efforts to legalize gay marriage, said Joseph Roberts, speaker of the Democrat-controlled Assembly.

"Same-sex marriage in New Jersey is only a matter of 'when', not 'if,'" Roberts said in a statement. "The report should spark a renewed sense of purpose and urgency to overcoming one of society's last remaining barriers to full equality for all residents."

THE ISSUE IN OTHER STATES

Two U.S. states, Massachusetts and Connecticut, have legalized same-sex marriage. Vermont, New Hampshire and Oregon also have civil union laws.

California voters in November approved an initiative denying marriage to same-sex couples, a vote that reversed a court decision to allow same-sex marriages. The California Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments on whether the process of banning gay marriage was constitutional and until it decides on the case, the ban is in force.

In New Jersey, some people in same-sex relationships have been denied the health insurance provided to their partners because the provider does not recognize civil unions, the report said.

The New Jersey law also may prevent people in a same-sex couple from making medical decisions for a partner because a hospital may not accept civil unions as equal to marriage, it said.

Assemblyman Michael Doherty, a Republican who opposes same-sex marriage, said the issue should be settled by voters in a ballot.

"The people of New Jersey should decide just like they did in California so that a judge doesn't have to," he said.

Yes Mr. Doherty, because the majority of voters should always have a say in how the law applies to people who don't share their opinion.

Still this is a good sign that America is still capable of taking steps forward.

[Kanastrous]

I guess it's a reflection of how poorly schools are teaching civics and government, when so many people apparently believe that in the United States laws are supposed to be passed based upon nothing but numeric majorities.

[Slacker]

I'll be a little annoyed if Jersey beats us to legalizing it. Because it's fucking Jersey.

[CmdrWilkens]

While the description of the panel does seem to have weighted towads pro-Marriage stance based on this article the fact that it included clergy members and yet still reached a unanimous decision strikes me as rather amazing and forward.

[Alferd Packer]

I'll be a little annoyed if Jersey beats us to legalizing it. Because it's fucking Jersey.

The vast majority of my state is, ah, whaddyacallit...oh yeah: civilized. By virtue of our extremely high population density (highest in the nation by far, and it's more than double that of New York state), there are only a few places in the state where a traditional monoculture exists anymore. If you move to NJ, odds are very good that your neighbor's gonna be Indian, or Korean, or black, or a single mom, or gay, or any other kind of conceivable minority, with the exception of the few remaining rural areas far removed from Manhattan and Philadelphia. Point being, the vast bulk of the state is very ethnically and religiously diverse, so most of the state's population has already been forced to deal with other cultures and belief systems.

As a result, it's tough to scare NJ voters into voting for(or against) something. Appeals to tradition have a much smaller impact, because most people in NJ have completely different sets of traditions from one another. IOW, it's much tougher to engender an "Us vs. Them" mindset, because there are so many "Thems"...so to speak.

As for New York state, can the same be said of it as New Jersey? I mean, sure, the city is the most wonderfully diverse place in the entire country, but what about the rest of the state? Maybe NY lawmakers think it's not a sure bet.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

I guess it's a reflection of how poorly schools are teaching civics and government, when so many people apparently believe that in the United States laws are supposed to be passed based upon nothing but numeric majorities.

I think what's more frightening is that the political system is not reflectively functioning the way it was intended to. Numeric majorities are not supposed to be the only thing that dictate public policy but yet it happens more often that it's supposed to.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

NJ Governor Urges Action On Gay Marriage Report
By 365gay Newscenter Staff
12.11.2008 1:45pm EST
(Trenton, New Jersey) New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine (D) is urging lawmakers to “seriously review” a report submitted by a blue ribbon state-appointed panel that found civil unions were not working and the law needs to be amended to provide for full marriage for same-sex couples.

The report was submitted to Corzine Tuesday by the New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission, set up by the legislature to monitor civil unions after the law was passed in 2006.
Corzine said he agreed with the report and that the civil unions law “hasn’t done enough to narrow the gap” with married opposite-sex couples.

“Indeed, the commission found the opposite - that civil unions may have widened that gap and fostered inequity by creating a separate class of relationships,” Corzine said in a statement.

“While this administration is focused squarely on the economic crisis for the foreseeable future, it’s clear that this issue of civil rights must be addressed sooner rather than later.”

But despite Corzine’s prodding Democrats who control the legislature are advocating a go slowly approach.

Senate President Richard Codey said there must be “incremental steps.”

“I believe that society’s view of this issue is coming around in favor of same-sex marriage and this report, underscoring the many inequalities that still exist, will further advance that belief,” Codey told The Herald News.

In 2006 the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that said same-sex couples must have the same legal rights as married pairs but it left it to the legislature to decide whether that should be through civil unions or marriage.

The legislature opted for civil unions and the law went into effect in 2007.

Despite reservations by Codey and some other lawmakers it is expected a same-sex marriage bill will be introduced in the upcoming session of the legislature.

LINK

Looks like things are coming around for NJ and the efforts there are closer to their goal of achieving marriage equality in New England by 2012.

[Slacker]

As for New York state, can the same be said of it as New Jersey? I mean, sure, the city is the most wonderfully diverse place in the entire country, but what about the rest of the state? Maybe NY lawmakers think it's not a sure bet.

Honestly, when it comes down to it, the population balance in this state is so skewed that if NYC and Long Island both decide to do something, upstate can kissass. Long Island's demographically trending bluer every election, and even our Republicans on LI tend to be more socially liberal than the national mean by a significant margin. New York would have a bill passing gay marriage rights in the legislature this year, provided the 'Gang of Three' in the Senate stop acting like a bunch of douchetards.

[CaptJodan]

I guess it's a reflection of how poorly schools are teaching civics and government, when so many people apparently believe that in the United States laws are supposed to be passed based upon nothing but numeric majorities.

Reminds me of a recent discussion with Jon Stewart on the Daily Show last week with the Huckster.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/1 ... 49906.html

In his view, it's important that gays prove to the public they deserve equal treatment. Aaannnd then he goes on to say he isn't a homophobe for thinking that. Lovely man.

[Stargate Nerd]

In his view, it's important that gays prove to the public they deserve equal treatment. Aaannnd then he goes on to say he isn't a homophobe for thinking that. Lovely man.

Jon Stewart is awesome. "When did you choose not to be gay"

[The Original Nex]

Looks like things are coming around for NJ and the efforts there are closer to their goal of achieving marriage equality in New England by 2012.

Nitpick: New England? I'm assuming you meant to say New Jersey here, as the article neither mentioned New England nor is New Jersey a New England state.

[CmdrWilkens]

Looks like things are coming around for NJ and the efforts there are closer to their goal of achieving marriage equality in New England by 2012.

Nitpick: New England? I'm assuming you meant to say New Jersey here, as the article neither mentioned New England nor is New Jersey a New England state.

I think he meant, for reasons that pass understanding given that its Jersey, to include New Jersey in the New England region where MA and CT already have Gay Marriage. Were NH, RI, VT, and ME to get off their asses then all of New England would have actual Gay Marriage.

[Slacker]

If we're including NJ in the mix, then one must also include NY-where it's entirely possible we *will* have gay marriage approved by an actual vote sooner rather than later.

[The Original Nex]

Looks like things are coming around for NJ and the efforts there are closer to their goal of achieving marriage equality in New England by 2012.

Nitpick: New England? I'm assuming you meant to say New Jersey here, as the article neither mentioned New England nor is New Jersey a New England state.

I think he meant, for reasons that pass understanding given that its Jersey, to include New Jersey in the New England region where MA and CT already have Gay Marriage. Were NH, RI, VT, and ME to get off their asses then all of New England would have actual Gay Marriage.

A new geographic organization of the Northeast perhaps? New England plus the Tri-state region? Of course as you say, the Tri-states seem to be closer to achieving same-sex marriage than most of New England. Are the other New England states besides MA and CT even considering measures?

[Pint0 Xtreme]

A new geographic organization of the Northeast perhaps? New England plus the Tri-state region? Of course as you say, the Tri-states seem to be closer to achieving same-sex marriage than most of New England. Are the other New England states besides MA and CT even considering measures?

Well, yes they are considering those measures. Vermont, for example, is certainly another state to watch for aside from New Jersey. The Boston based group that helped score the first victory in Massachusetts have indicated that their goal is to get same-sex marriagein the other four states by 2012.

Gay marriage throughout New England by 2012?
By 365gay Newscenter Staff
11.18.2008 5:15pm EST
(Boston, Massachusetts) The Boston-based group that won equal marriage rights in Massachusetts and Connecticut said Tuesday it intends to fight for gay marriage rights in the other four New England states and predicted success by 2012.

Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders announced the campaign on the fifth anniversary of the Massachusetts court ruling that opened up marriage to gays and lesbians. GLAD dubbed the campaign “Six by Twelve.”
“We can make New England a marriage equality zone by strategically combining existing legal, electoral, and on-the-ground know-how to fast-track marriage in every New England state,” said GLAD Executive Director Lee Swislow.

“By 2012, we not only can have marriage equality throughout New England, we can have a road map for the rest of the country.”

GLAD said it would achieve this goal through litigation and by working with statewide equality groups and with MassEquality, which lobbied politicians and led the fight against two bids over three years to void gay marriage through constitutional amendment.

“The route to marriage equality looks different in each state—not every state is ripe for a marriage lawsuit like Massachusetts and Connecticut,” said Swislow.

“Through our collaboration with MassEquality, we can add value to the state equality groups. To the state groups’ local knowledge, grassroots experience and organizing strength, GLAD brings legal and communications expertise and MassEquality brings proven experience in legislative, political, and electoral strategy. This combination will accelerate the pace to marriage equality.” Swislow said.

In Connecticut ,GLAD teamed up with Love Makes A Family to achieve marriage equality.

In the remaining four states, GLAD said it would work with Equality Maine, Marriage Equality Rhode Island, Vermont Freedom to Marry and a variety of allies in New Hampshire.

GLAD’s announcement comes on the heels of Proposition 8 in California, a voter-led initiative that amended that state’s constitution to end same-sex marriage there.