NOM BLOG

New Jersey Attorney General Seeks to Dismiss New SSM Lawsuit

 

The Associated Press:

The latest lawsuit that seeks to force New Jersey to recognize gay marriage will soon be going before a judge for the first time.

State Superior Court Judge Linda Feinberg has scheduled a hearing for Friday on the state's motion to have the suit dismissed. The state Attorney General's Office says the matter is already settled.

The state Supreme Court ruled five years ago that New Jersey had to give committed gay same-sex couples all the legal rights and benefits that married couples have — but said it didn't have to recognize gay marriage.

2 Comments

  1. Louis E.
    Posted November 2, 2011 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

    Let's hope bad doesn't become worse,but the state constitution needs to be amended to require that opposite-sex couples be granted eligible for a status unambiguously superior than available to same-sex ones.

  2. Little man
    Posted November 3, 2011 at 4:34 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, George Washington (the first US President) and the early founders of the US government wouldn't have thought of adding 'spouse=a person of the opposite sex' to every law related to 'marriage' or 'family'. They had their way to handle the LGBT claims - lynch them - which put the rest into 'the closet'. Now, since homosexuality is considered a behavior, which can be corrected voluntarily, and therefore its sexual act is not classified as a crime, we realize, the laws were not written explicitly enough. How would they have known that two men would want their homosexual relationship recognized as a sort of marriage? There's no constitutional language against it. (I personally believe so-called Lesbian behavior is harmless.) It's like 9/11, when the USA got caught 'with its pants down' - didn't really expect it. Or like Pearl Harbor - didn't really expect it. Though the government should have. Each State, and the Federal government had to make laws or amend their constitutions to include spouse=a person of the opposite sex, after the fact. It's a slow gradual progress. Friendships don't classify as marriage; far from it. Some blood-related partnerships (like an aunt and nice who need to live together) would classify first. It is very clear. Don't get brain-washed. There's a reasonable basis for marriage to be regulated. Otherwise, no partnerships need to be regulated in a special way.