N.J. Senate rejects same-sex marriage

[Ian David]

Source: Philadelphia Inquirer

The New Jersey Senate today rejected a bill to allow same-sex marriage, ending - for now - advocates' hopes of making the Garden State the sixth state in the country to allow same sex couples to wed.

After about 90 minutes of debate, 14 senators voted in favor of the bill, with 20 opposed. The bill needed 21 affirmative votes to pass.

Senators in favor of same-sex marriage compared the issue to the civil rights battles fought by African-Americans and women, while senators against argued the redefinition of the institution of marriage was a question best put to voters.

While expected, the defeat of the bill marks a significant blow to gay rights activists nationwide who had pinned their hopes on New Jersey.


Read more: http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/80941807.html

---

See also:

New Jersey State Senate defeats marriage equality, Lambda Legal to go back to the courts
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x154351

Watch the NJ marriage debate and vote live now
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=154319&mesg_id=154319

With NJ same-sex marriage defeat, supporters are going back to court
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x154349

[Hell Hath No Fury]

1. Shit. Shit. Shit.

This is an issue that will, ultimately, have to be decided on the federal level. Can't wait for it to get there.

[onehandle]

2. Will somebody tell me when or why not gay marriage will go to SCOTUS?

Yes, I know we have a right-wing court (thanks, Ralph), but why isn't this going to the top?

Enlighten me.

[FarLeftFist]

4. True. As an issue of civil rights this should go to the SCOTUS

[CreekDog]

12. because they don't want to lose and be stuck with a Plessy-Ferguson type precedent for decades

would you recommend that civil rights for gays be handled the way they were done for African Americans, methodically, shrewdly, incrementally, but successfully...

or would you just like to throw everything we have in every venue possible not picking our battles and selecting our fights for maximum outcome?

you tell me what's better?

[Unvanguard]

25. It is, now, thanks to Ted Olson and David Boies.

Whether or not it should be is a more complicated question.

[uppityperson]

3. I don't see why this should be states, not fed, rather like women voting, and other civil rights

[shadowknows69]

10. Because then our God infested government would have to show its bigotry

And lack of adherence to our founding beliefs.

[Freddie Stubbs]

15. It took a constitutional amendment for womans' sufferage

[Unvanguard]

26. Because marriage is, constitutionally, a state issue.

And that's good for us: we would lose decisively if this were a federal issue. To ban same-sex marriage nationwide they had to try a constitutional amendment, and they never had the votes for that.

[alp227]

5. BOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Somebody better get same-sex marriage before the Supreme Court. Turns out that neither the people nor their elected representatives are willing to get with the times.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

6. Assholes.

[Soylent Brice]

7. 20 bigoted state senators in NJ need to be tossed out on their asses.

[Zhade]

8. Bigots.

Well, it took a long time for non-whites to get rights, and since our struggle is the same in the end we will not be denied.

Keep fighting!

[shadowknows69]

9. Well Jersey certainly couldn't let NY outdo it in the hatred department.

If I had any money I would be out of this State (NY) faster than flies on shit.

[naaman fletcher]

11. assholes. nt.

[mrbarber]

13. Let's get the 20 senators name..

So they can go down in history alongside such fellow bigots like Jim Crow.

History will not be kind to them.

[Freddie Stubbs]

16. Here:

http://cbs3.com/wireapnewsnj/NJ.Senate.gay.2.1411813.html

[twitomy]

14. Try again. Persistance pays off NT

[Freddie Stubbs]

18. The problem is that later this month NJ get a new Governor

And he will veto a marriage equity bill.

[twitomy]

22. Well that certainly wont help.

But previous Civil Rights "wars" had their fair share of lost battles, but the wars were eventually won. Might have to take some steps back before you can take some steps forward. I guess what I am saying is dont let this disappointment stop one from fighting the fight.

Just trying to offer some encouragement FWIW...

[Jamastiene]

17. What.Fucking.Assholes.

[sakabatou]

21. My reaction exactly

[tabbycat31]

19. I was in the statehouse for the vote

my senator gave a speech about how great gays are for the community and how they increase property values, says he represents the gayest district in NJ, yet voted no.

Hypocrite.

The battle's lost but not the war.

[Unvanguard]

28. Sean Kean? I read about that.

Here's hoping all the gays in his district throw him out of office.

[tabbycat31]

29. yes

watch for a scathing article on him from me on Blue Jersey

[kevinbgoode]

20. "senators against argued the redefinition of the institution of marriage was a question best put to

voters". . .Right. Like the voters always voted on "marriage" before. . .for anyone else. I'd like a chance to vote on the marriages of a whole lot of people I know - if this is such a "public" relationship, and only the rights of gays must be voted on by the masses, then why the hell have I never been allowed to vote on the heteros I know whose personal track record should have banned them from marriage?

[JerseygirlCT]

24. I know.

The "logic" is stunning, isn't it?

How many other civil rights do they think we ought to put up for a vote?

[JerseygirlCT]

23. Oh crap.

I really expected better from my home state.

[defendandprotect]

27. This is shameful . . . shame on my state of NJ!!!