State Republican Chairman Jay Weber sent out this statement today on the state Senate’s wrong-headed vote on same-sex marriage:
“From the beginning, Republicans have opposed legislative and judicial efforts to redefine marriage in New Jersey and called for any changes to be put on the ballot for voters to decide. We believe that the majority of New Jerseyans agree with that position, and following the failure of this bill in today’s Senate vote, I am heartened to see that the Senate has respected the will of the people.”
Back in the early 1960s, marriage was defined as not only being between a man and a woman, but interracial marriages were against the law in many states. And the bulk of Americans probably wanted it to stay that way.
Forty years have passed and there are few today — aside from a couple of recalcitrant southerners — who would seek to take us back to that point.
But let’s go back there for a minute — at least intellectually — and ask the question that Weber’s statement raises: Should the lifting of the ban on interracial marriage have been “put on the ballots for voters to decide”? Of course not.
So, why should same-sex marriage be put to a referendum?
The Senate, unfortunately, has allowed conservative religious leaders and their political acolytes to elevate the strictures of their belief system above those of the rest of the state’s citizens, which does a disservice to gays and lesbians and anyone who disagrees with the conservative religious position.
I’ve said for a long time that the best approach, legally, might be to remove the word marriage from the statute book and replace it with some other legal construct and leave marriage to the realm of religion. I understand the cultural attachment to the word, but I just can’t see how we’re going to get past this without taking the debate in a new direction.
Any thoughts?
Hank Kalet 
I'm old enough to remember people using the biblical argument against interracial marriage, so called \”race mixing\” or even just interracial dating. They would say it was against the bible, against nature, because ducks cohabit with ducks and not with iguanas. They kind of missed the point that blacks and whites are humans, they are not a different species. Now (and forever) they say that gays are against nature and homosexuality is against the bible and morality. It's an abomination, don't you know. So sorry but nature and animals are rife with homosexuality and homosexual acts. Homosexuality is not against nature it's an integral part of it. Fred Phelps is spinning in his crypt and he's not even dead.
It's naive for Repugs to think marriage equality, with well-funded advocacy, would not pass on a general ballot here in two or three years. The demographics are going that way. Right now, there's more public support for it than it got in the Senate.
Why do we permit the gooferment to have ANY role in \”marriage\”?
Why is government involved in marriage? Then why have government involved in our legal and judicial system? I really do not want Wal-Mart running our judicial system. Making marriage legal is done for a whole host of reasons. Otherwise two people could just pronounce themselves married without the blessing of the state but it would have no legal standing in a court of law. Because marriage is a contract between two parties and what happens if the two parties find it necessary to end that contract for any number of reasons. Lots of marriages end in divorce, so what happens to property, money, the kids, the pets, etc. We are a nation of laws, so we leave it up to the courts, our legal system to sort out the mess, the marital train wrecks.
In the short term, many of the 13 Democrats and 1 Republican who voted for this sinful bill will lose their jobs. In the long term, I think they all know where they are going.
Hey \”Moral Majority,\” did you know that every U.S. legislator that has ever voted for marriage equality has been reelected? They have a literal 100% reelection rate. You can read the full report from Freedom to Marry (which has no interest in getting its allies voted out of office) here.
Geoff,I think you know where you're going.
That's precious, Moral Majority \”knows\” where everyone is going based on their approval or disapproval of gay marriage? I guess he thinks he's got a hot line to Allah. After my conversation with Jupiter, I was assured that MM would definitely be going to the river Styx. Ta, ta.