The New Jersey Statehouse Bureau:
The state Senate passed a bill legalizing gay marriage this afternoon by a vote of 24-16.
Two republicans, Sen. Jennifer Beck (R-Monmouth) and Sen. Diane Allen (R-Burlington) voted yes on the bill.
... Two Democrats, Sen. Ronald Rice (D-Essex) and Sen. Jeff Van Drew (D-Cape May), voted no.
The 24 votes in favor of the bill leaves supporters three votes short of the 27 votes they would need to override Christie’s veto.
The debate lasted less than an hour, with only Sen. Gerry Cardinale (R-Bergen) speaking against the bill.
"The essential characteristic of a marriage, the very definition of the term, is it involves at least one male and one female,” Cardinale said. “Do not break with thousands of years of civilized tradition. This bill opens Pandora’s box.”
The Assembly will take up the bill on Thursday.
Christie, who opposes gay marriage, wants to put the issue on the ballot in November, but Democrats have rejected that option, saying civil rights should not be subject to popular vote.
17 Comments
Correction, we have 2 more years to achieve the 3 (yes 3) more votes needed to overturn a veto.
Glad to see it failed to achieve the 2/3. Will be interesting to see what happens in the General Assembly.
Isn't it interesting that this vote, along with Washington's, had support from both parties. Seems that support of same-sex marriage is not as partisan as you'd like to think. Kudos to the Republicans who voted for this bill.
Yes, and just two years ago the same bill failed in the NJ Senate. Public opinion will keep shifting, and by January, 2014 we will have those 3 votes.
More evidence against the strict scrutiny claim.
Which is it, Publius: Is marriage equality finally (slowly) coming to fruition or "has man/woman marriage won 31 of 31?"
Is the fact there is a highly funded organization like NOM willing to take money from a huge organization like the Mormon church to fight equality every inch o the way totally ignored when you throw the "strict scrutiny claim out the window with every victory equality makes?
So the NJ Senate (and soon to be house) voted for Marriage Equality today, you still have the Governor who has promised to veto it.
Which is it, Publius? Hmmm?
Hate to burst the happy bubbles of SSM supporters, but in 3 years you may actually have *fewer* votes in support of marriage corruption. Time will tell. It all depends upon whether or not sleeping voters start paying a little more attention to all the negative consequences of SSM.
@katie
It is widely partisan. Just because a handful of Republicans vote with a liberal agenda means nothing. That would be like saying the Democratic party isn't as liberal as people think because Zel Miller voted with the GOP almost 90% of the time.
So, if invent a civil right to myself, the popular vote cannot deny it to me? When exactly are people denied a vote? I know it depends on the State, so how come the general statement?
In two years, the resistance against this bill will mount, as the Republicans suffer the consequences of their vote in New Jersey. In the meantime, the election will take place. Oh! We do get to vote on a so-called civil right. How do we know it is a civil right? By sympathy? Not.
@Curious
The two statements are not contradictory. When put to the people directly, the traditional definition has a solid record of success. And when put to legislatures or public opinion polls the issues is much more closely divided with some jurisdictions now deciding to redefine marriage, some willing to create civil unions, and some rejecting both.
People of all faiths (and of no faith) have a right to give to NOM or HRC. The No on 8 forces raised much more money than the Yes on 8 forces both from in state and out of state sources. You shouldn’t claim strict scrutiny when your side raised much more money. The legislature and everyone statewide office in California is controlled by the Democratic Party, which favors marriage redefinition with many of its officers members of the LGBT caucus. You shouldn’t claim strict scrutiny when your side controls so many government offices.
To be a suspect class, that class must be politically powerless. Gays in California are arguably the most powerful single lobby in the state. To consider them powerless in California is a joke.
Good points Publius.
Christie, who opposes gay marriage, wants to put the issue on the ballot in November, but Democrats have rejected that option, saying civil rights should not be subject to popular vote.
To all of us who believe in a democracy and the right of the people should take the above statement from the reigning Democrats with alarm. Under their new rules if they think they cannot win fair and square at the ballot box then our constituitional right to vote has to be denied.
It's a shame we don't live in a democracy
Excellent, Publius. Good point, John.
You guys truly do have your head buried in the sand, if you think marriage equality will have anything but increasing support over the years. Not only has that been an ongoing trend for over a decade, but the rate of increase of that support is quickening.
The vast majority of Democratic voters and nearly all Democratic legislators, an ever growing number of Republican voters, and even now some Republican legislators, are on board with equality, and that trend shows no sign of abatement.