Judge Rules N.J. Must Allow Gay Marriage

Judge Rules N.J. Must Allow Gay Marriage

There are 44 comments on the Wall Street Journal story from Sep 29, 2013, titled Judge Rules N.J. Must Allow Gay Marriage. In it, Wall Street Journal reports that:

A state judge's ruling Friday would make New Jersey the latest state to allow same-sex couples to marry, setting up a potential legal battle with the administration of Gov. Chris Christie .

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Wall Street Journal.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#1 Sep 29, 2013
The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled many years ago that LGBT people have the right to marry in New Jersey.

Since: Jan 12

New Port Richey, FL

#2 Sep 30, 2013
the fat lady hasn't sang yet in jersey's case the fat man or should I say huge

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#3 Sep 30, 2013
Perhaps the NJ Supreme Court will remember that, and not take any case presented to it, and let the ruling of the lower court stand, since it already mirrors their previous decision.

Since: Jan 12

New Port Richey, FL

#4 Sep 30, 2013
Quest wrote:
Perhaps the NJ Supreme Court will remember that, and not take any case presented to it, and let the ruling of the lower court stand, since it already mirrors their previous decision.
depends on if the judge is a republican appointee or not

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#5 Sep 30, 2013
disaster in the making wrote:
<quoted text>
depends on if the judge is a republican appointee or not
That shouldn't make a difference, should it? In a sensible world, Republican appointees should be even MORE against unconstitutional government intervention into people's lives and marriages. They often complain about the "nanny state", and should be less likely to try to impose it on others, right?

And would a Republican appointee be any less likely to look at the case law already in place, from a case already decided once?

And we must remember that Judge Walker was a Republican nominee, in CA.
Gremlin

Louisville, KY

#9 Sep 30, 2013
Hans wrote:
<quoted text>
In a sensible world homosexuality would be outlawed.
How can you prevent what two consenting adults do behind closed doors, Einstein?

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#10 Sep 30, 2013
As obvious as the ruling may be, I wish the judge had followed Judge Walker's precedent and held a full trial. It would be nice to have the evidence of inadequacy in the record. And it would be fun to watch opponents dissemble under oath, again.
Pierre

France

#11 Sep 30, 2013
Gremlin wrote:
<quoted text>How can you prevent what two consenting adults do behind closed doors, Einstein?
I have no problem with what queers do behind closed doors. But they don't keep it behind closed doors, they're running around flaunting their sickness in everyone's face. THAT'S THE PROBLEM!
Gremlin

Louisville, KY

#12 Sep 30, 2013
Pierre wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with what queers do behind closed doors. But they don't keep it behind closed doors, they're running around flaunting their sickness in everyone's face. THAT'S THE PROBLEM!
So straight couples have the right to hold hands and kiss in public, but gay couples don't? What you don't like is the fact that we're gaining our civil rights, and you can't do a thing about it. It poses a huge threat to your "straight is superior" delusion. Gay people are here to stay.....get used to it.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#13 Sep 30, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
As obvious as the ruling may be, I wish the judge had followed Judge Walker's precedent and held a full trial. It would be nice to have the evidence of inadequacy in the record. And it would be fun to watch opponents dissemble under oath, again.
I don't think that's necessary. The New Jersey Supreme Court ordered marriage equality man years ago, and the state has refused to comply with the court's ruling. I think that part of the matter is settled.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#15 Sep 30, 2013
Florida Gator wrote:
<quoted text>
What Straight couples do, holding hands & kissing, is normal behavior that is expected and thought nothing of. Queers on the other hand and what they do, is NOT normal and should not be flaunted in public.
Why not ?!:)

If straight women can go prancing down the street with their big bare boobs bouncing in the breeze for all the world to see, then why can't we hold hands on the street ?!:)

“A long time ago”

Since: Nov 09

in a galaxy far, far away....

#17 Sep 30, 2013
Florida Gator wrote:
What Straight couples do, holding hands & kissing, is normal behavior that is expected and thought nothing of. Queers on the other hand and what they do, is NOT normal and should not be flaunted in public.
Good luck getting it criminalized. I think your chances are slim.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#18 Sep 30, 2013
disaster in the making wrote:
<quoted text>
depends on if the judge is a republican appointee or not
Wasn't Judge Walker out in California a Reagan appointee?? Or Daddy Bush?? I don't think he was a Democratic appointee....

Any judge of any persuasion or political ilk should easily be able to see that laws that carve out a subset of citizens for unequal treatment based solely on someone else's religious beliefs cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#19 Sep 30, 2013
Pierre wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with what queers do behind closed doors. But they don't keep it behind closed doors, they're running around flaunting their sickness in everyone's face. THAT'S THE PROBLEM!
Be sure to let us know when straight people stop doing that, okay?

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#20 Sep 30, 2013
Pierre wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with what queers do behind closed doors. But they don't keep it behind closed doors, they're running around flaunting their sickness in everyone's face. THAT'S THE PROBLEM!
We'll make a deal with you. We''l stop doing all that stuff as soon as all you str8 people doing all that stuff too.

DEAL ?!:)
Florida Gator

United States

#21 Sep 30, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>Why not ?!:)

If straight women can go prancing down the street with their big bare boobs bouncing in the breeze for all the world to see, then why can't we hold hands on the street ?!:)
That's because it's not normal for to queers to carry on out in public, it's perverted.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#22 Sep 30, 2013
Hans wrote:
<quoted text>
In a sensible world homosexuality would be outlawed.
In a sense world, people don't lie and pretend to be from other countries, LITTLE cowardly liar.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#23 Sep 30, 2013
Pierre wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with what queers do behind closed doors. But they don't keep it behind closed doors, they're running around flaunting their sickness in everyone's face. THAT'S THE PROBLEM!
I have no problem with people who tell the truth, but LITTLE cowardly liars who make up fake names and pretend to be from other countries, despicable. Lying day and night. THAT'S THE PROBLEM!

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#24 Sep 30, 2013
Pierre wrote:
... they're running around flaunting their sickness in everyone's face...
This is not the correct place to share your sordid fantasies. Try Manhunt.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#25 Sep 30, 2013
Hans wrote:
<quoted text>
In a sensible world homosexuality would be outlawed.
In a sensible world people like you and Gov. Christie would understand that the US Supreme Court ruled on voting over Constitutional Rights in the 1943 West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette decision.

"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."

-Majority opinion

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Magistrate who said gay couples aren't as good ... 2 min Wondering 75
News Church says gay teacher fired by Miami Catholic... 3 min Wondering 76
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 32 min Tre H 18,794
News Are Gay Dads 'Treating Women as Mere Breeding M... 48 min Concerned 13
News "Ex-Gay" Speaker Invited by HCFA Draws Protest 53 min Ted Haggard s Mas... 12
News Gay Bermudian man reveals why he wona t be goin... 54 min Rainbow Kid 2
News Arkansas to pay attorney for same-sex couples i... 54 min Wondering 22
News Bill seeks to bar companies from citing religio... 2 hr Wondering 100
The Spectrum Cafe (Dec '07) 3 hr Chester NE 27,401
More from around the web