Gay couples wed just after midnight as same-sex marriage is recognized in NJ

Oct 20, 2013 Full story: The Winnipeg Free Press 47

Gay couples exchanged vows in early morning ceremonies in several New Jersey communities Monday as the state began recognizing their marriages at 12:01 a.m., becoming the 14th state to do so.

Full Story
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#41 Oct 22, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
The only reason I added Ohio is because they have the referendum option, like Michigan. It's still likely a long shot even in 2016.
That's why I say we're quickly running out of states where anything is possible without the federal courts acting.
Which is exactly why I have been saying our limited resources should be devoted to pursuing the matter in the federal courts, and not the many state courts, particularly when there are states we will NEVER persuade, as was the case in inter-racial marriages.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#42 Oct 22, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Which is exactly why I have been saying our limited resources should be devoted to pursuing the matter in the federal courts, and not the many state courts, particularly when there are states we will NEVER persuade, as was the case in inter-racial marriages.
Except for the fact that the more states we have in our column the more likely the SCOTUS is to take the case(s) and rule in our favor.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#43 Oct 22, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Except for the fact that the more states we have in our column the more likely the SCOTUS is to take the case(s) and rule in our favor.
I think we're past that tipping point. Especially since large states like California, New York, and New Jersey are in our column.

I think devoting resources to smaller states, especially the ones in the Deep South that nobody ever heard of before anyways, is a waste of time.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#45 Oct 22, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I think we're past that tipping point. Especially since large states like California, New York, and New Jersey are in our column.
I think devoting resources to smaller states, especially the ones in the Deep South that nobody ever heard of before anyways, is a waste of time.
Who's talking about small states in the deep south?

Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, etc.

Populous Midwest states.

No time to rest on our laurels hoping the SCOTUS will come to the rescue.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#46 Oct 22, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text> ... But on the other hand, what Christie vetoed along with marriage equality was the additional protections that were in the bill to protect the religious bigots from their own ignorance when they refuse to participate in marriage equality ... Of course, they already HAVE those protections in the 1st Amendment's guarantee of freedom of religion, but they would have had yet another layer protection had their Golden Boy not vetoed that bill.
So I'm not so sure. Once again, the bigots have shot themselves in the foot. I don't think anyone's thinking about that aspect of the law, but I think it's an important point to make--when the courts force equal rights, all the little goodies that are tacked onto a bill aren't there. So if they want the extra bigot-protections, they need to quit opposing the legislation because that's the only way those extra protection get enacted.
I hadn't thought about that wrinkle in the Courts Ruling.

I have to disagree with your acceptance of the "additional protection" assertion.

To enact ANY Law, even one that is purported to provide "additional protection", in fact actually WEAKENS the First Amendment by the action of making a "Law respecting and establishment of Religion".

This is precisely what the Reconstructionists and Dominionists want. Once that door is opened it puts the issues into the Legislative and Initiative realm ... PRECISELY where the framers of the Constitution wanted it to NEVER BE.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#47 Oct 23, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
I hadn't thought about that wrinkle in the Courts Ruling.
I have to disagree with your acceptance of the "additional protection" assertion.
To enact ANY Law, even one that is purported to provide "additional protection", in fact actually WEAKENS the First Amendment by the action of making a "Law respecting and establishment of Religion".
This is precisely what the Reconstructionists and Dominionists want. Once that door is opened it puts the issues into the Legislative and Initiative realm ... PRECISELY where the framers of the Constitution wanted it to NEVER BE.
Interesting. I hadn't thought of it from that angle.

I find it tragic and sad that putting something into these bills that "protect" the religious idiots when what's being "protected" is already clearly and specifically covered in the 1st Amendment, is often the tipping point in getting the legislation passed.

You're right, though. To pass more laws specifically "protecting" religious bigotry is *ALSO* unconstitutional, isn't it?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#48 Oct 23, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting. I hadn't thought of it from that angle.
I find it tragic and sad that putting something into these bills that "protect" the religious idiots when what's being "protected" is already clearly and specifically covered in the 1st Amendment, is often the tipping point in getting the legislation passed.
You're right, though. To pass more laws specifically "protecting" religious bigotry is *ALSO* unconstitutional, isn't it?
Indeed.

Further, it places the already-protected Right into the minds of the Citizenry as something that is legislatible. It may be a necessary compromise, but it has me biting my nails down to the nubbin.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Belmar Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
How Asbury Can Help Launch Your Product or Idea Wed M studio 1
Bill takes aim at NJ beach smokers (Mar '14) Sep 16 BillDuckman 10
Get outta here! 41 percent of New Jerseyans wou... Sep 14 Garda Hyde 4
Michael Jackson, family items could be yours Sep 13 Pop Tart- 12
sea girt inn (Sep '06) Sep 4 Ed Quinn - Rockaw... 137
House Fire Was Dog's Fault: Police Sep 4 Pope Benedickt 5
Better Your Business with M studio at Asbury Agile Sep 2 M studio 1
•••

Belmar News Video

•••
•••

Belmar Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Belmar People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Belmar News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Belmar
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••