New Jersey's highest court ruled Wednesday that gay couples are entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals, but that lawmakers must determine whether the state will honor gay marriage or some other form of civil union.
The high court gave lawmakers 180 days to rewrite marriage laws to either include same-sex couples or create a new system of civil unions for them.
The ruling is similar to the 1999 decision in Vermont that led to civil unions there, which offer the benefits of marriage, but not the name.
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Good or Bad News in N.J.?
NJ Court Stops Short of Gay Marriage OK
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is bad news, very bad news. Not because of the stem cell issue--but because this activist court dares, as it has in the past, to ORDER the legislature to enact a law. What right does the court have to order another branch of government to make law? The court's function is to interpret the law or to derive it from existing law.
ReplyDeleteThis sort of judicial activism is what happened in Roe v. Wade, where the Supreme Court of the U.S. found a "right" to abort in the U.S. Constitution, something which just plain is not there, and was never before found in any case law. When the Constitution was written, and until well into the second half of the 20th century, abortion was, unequivocally, a crime.
So, while one who does not want to see same-sex marriages recognized as "legal" may think this decision is not so bad, it is, in reality, terrible. Terrible because its logical underpinning is flawed, and flawed in a way that can only lead to worse problems later on.
New Jersey Catholic, J.D.