Marriage Equality in New Jersey: With or Without Chris Christie

[Ian David]

Marriage Equality in New Jersey: With or Without Chris Christie

Yesterday, the New Jersey Assembly joined with the State Senate and passed a bill endorsing same-sex marriage in a 42 to 33 vote. If marriage equality becomes law, New Jersey will become the eighth state to destroy what the Assembly speaker called one of the “last legalized barriers to equal rights.”

In a pivotal moment, New Jersey lawmakers did more than stand up for the institution of marriage; they chose to begin legally recognizing and protecting the civil rights of every resident of their state. They showed that no matter who one loves, the state should not limit the ability to fully commit to that person. As Newark Assemblywoman Cleopatra G. Tucker put it, “I came to the conclusion that the people sent me here from my district, here to protect what’s right…To protect the rights of everyone.”

Unfortunately, Governor Chris Christie has sworn to veto the new legislation, insisting that the legislature subject the basic civil rights of their fellow citizens to a referendum.

Proponents of marriage equality are not accepting this alternative, and are preparing to form even stronger coalitions to override Gov. Christie’s impending veto. Polls indicate growing support for same-sex marriage among voters, a trend that will likely continue over the next two years, providing the support the legislature needs to override the veto.

More:
http://blog.pfaw.org/content/marriage-equality-new-jersey-with-or-without-chris-christie

[Ruby the Liberal]

1. Inasmuch as I LOATHE the entire concept

of putting civil rights to a vote, what if the good people of New Jersey DO stand up and tell Christie to blow it out his ass on this? What happens then in that state?

[HockeyMom]

2. Do you have the support of the people?

Athough I do agree that the people should NOT have say on civil rights issues, but ANYTHING to slap down his rotund self would be a joy.

I do agree with that PFLAG email I got. It would be just as sweet to change the minds of some "No" vote legislators to override his Veto. You have 2 years to do it.

Meanwhile Christie's NJ citizens will be getting in their cars, and marrying, and spending money, in NEW YORK in the meantime. Great for the New Jersey economy, eh, Christie? The laugh is on YOU on that one.

[JustAnotherGen]

3. I think we would

No - Civil Rights and Liberties should not be left up to public vote -

But - the MAJORITY in this state want to just let it happen and move on to being prosperous again - hopefully without Christie.

And it would be a HUGE smack in Guv'nah Doughboys face if we could get it done. And I think we could get it done. If we can get it on the ballot for the G.E. in November - hands down flat out a win. All moderates, progressives, liberals will be out in full force in November.

[HockeyMom]

4. It doesn't require that many signatures to get it on the ballot

You probably could do it before November. You know, that would shut up a lot those "let the people vote and they will turn it down". Imagine that? If it DID pass on a referendum? The FIRST in the country. Maybe that might be enough of a turnaround for some people? It is certainly worth a try.

[JackBeck]

5. A referendum needs to go through the Legislature.

Steve Sweeney, our Senate President, agrees with us that civil rights should never be put up for a vote by the people. Also, referendum votes are costly and would bring millions of out-of-state opposition money into our state to create media. I believe just during the Prop.8 battle alone it cost $85 million dollars collectively.

We will continue to bring more votes over to our side. We also have a lawsuit working its way through the courts and even though Christie just vetoed the legislation, the fact that it passed both chambers shows legislative intent and will help our lawsuit.

[HockeyMom]

6. We called, emailed those "No" legislators in NY

From what I read their phones went off the hook, and mail flooded. I sent one upstate legislator an email of Mildred Loving's 2007 statement on the the civil rights comparison between her and her husband's SC case and the fight for Marriage Equality. I was very surprised to receive a personal email back from him. I found out he was a Catholic and an attorney. He thanked me for my email and said that as an attorney he fully agreed with the Civil Rights correlation between interracial marriage and gay marriage. He said as a Catholic his faith was against it, but that he also understood that he couldn't let his own personal faith interfer with his duties as an elected representative of ALL PEOPLE in his state. He could not let his faith dictate to others. It was a very unexcepted, and nice, email. He did vote for Equality. I should have saved it. I guess you never know?

Good luck in your fight.

[JustAnotherGen]

7. Fair Points