The court said that the state legislature has six months to pass a law providing domestic partners with all the same rights as married couples. But it stopped short of requiring the state to let gays become married. Was this a victory, a setback or a little of both?
2006-10-25 14:09:52 · 18 answers · asked by Rob B 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
neither really its just one more step on the path to an enlightened society ,it will happen in the end anyway. America cant really stay backwards for to long eventually it will catch up this is just one more step in the right direction.
hugs
2006-10-25 14:14:15 · answer #1 · answered by Bearable 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Neither, really. New Jersey already had domestic partnership laws on the books. Civil Unions would grant a few more rights I believe, but it is still "separate but equal". Without the legislature approving gay marriage (and I don't think they will), people from other states will not be travelling to NJ to get a civil union since the equal faith and protection clauses covering marriage were null and void by the Federal Defense of Marriage act.
Basically, the state supreme court verified what was already on the NJ lawbooks and didn't push the envelope any further.
2006-10-25 15:25:54 · answer #2 · answered by dougeebear 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've just read on the aussie internet that the judge had let the law pass so they can get marriage. Apparently it is up to the state officials whether or not it is called marriage.
I don't think people so much want it called married - it's more the fact that they want to be recognised on the same level. I wouldn't care what it was called - it is about the love. I just wish Australia would hurry up and catch up with this legislation.
2006-10-25 15:50:59 · answer #3 · answered by gretphemelger 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it's a victory, at best. It's SOMETHING, better than nothing. They could have passed a ban on same-sex marriage. Instead, they're making the state write a law that provides us the same rights as straight couples. Whether it's called marriage or no, makes no difference to me. I don't need the state to validate my marriage, God will do that.
2006-10-25 15:34:52 · answer #4 · answered by Agent Double EL 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that's an outstanding ruling. the pupil team needed respected attractiveness from the college (and the money that flow alongside with that attractiveness), yet refused to connect as much as the college's non-discrimination coverage, which all pupil communities might desire to achieve this as to realize respected attractiveness. whilst the college stated, "sorry, yet no settlement, no attractiveness, easy as that", the pupil regulation team sued for religious discrimination. The courtroom have been given it actual perfect; you could't have it the two strategies and get a particular exemption. I merely want this wasn't yet yet another 5-4 decision; meaning the project is going to come again up back, whilst somebody thinks the composition of the courtroom is greater "favorable" to their argument. @MM: elementary adequate element approximately federal money, yet a super form of the money in question here got here from a pool that became funded via "pupil interest fees" that each and every physique on the college will pay into as area of the traditional training cost. The college has the non-discrimination coverage in place precisely so a discriminatory team does no longer be funded via the very pupils who it excludes, which could be tremendously perverse, yeah?
2016-11-25 20:54:24 · answer #5 · answered by saragosa 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not a setback, but not a victory either. I applaud NJ for coming to grips with reality, but I have my doubts that the legislature will do the right thing. I guess we'll have to keep those "white's only, oh sorry, straights only" signs up by the public bathrooms a bit longer.
2006-10-25 14:17:19 · answer #6 · answered by tjnstlouismo 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Just in time for elections. No it was a victory for the republican party who will now use the same bigoted hatred to there advantage they did the last time and use it to stir hate and to try and win the republican seat in the senate. This is why King George is in the white house.Thats what they did the last time. I think a republican congress is a set back for Gay rights, human rights and just everything that is right.
2006-10-25 14:16:51 · answer #7 · answered by Rich 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It was a victory. Giving us the same rights is the most important part. Gay marriage will come somewhat later.
2006-10-26 14:54:57 · answer #8 · answered by Cassie G. 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definitely
2006-10-25 14:20:16 · answer #9 · answered by tammidee10 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This was a victory, because at the very least gays in NJ will have civil unions, which is more than they had before.
They could change it to gay marraige, though, nothing is set in stone yet.
2006-10-25 17:46:30 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
a victory, in my opinion. yet another step in the right direction. however, I thought leaving it up to the legislature to decide if it will actually be "marriage" or "civil unions" kinda sucks. why can't it just be marriage?! it's NOT going to hurt anyone!
2006-10-25 15:15:30 · answer #11 · answered by redcatt63 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋