Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no excuse for a republican to veto because our last gov in Connecticut happened to be a republican didnt veto. This is not fair for gay community in Jesery... I'm gay myself and that really made me angry
Gov Jodi Rell is conservative that felt it should be between a male and female but she didnt veto because she believes it is Constitutional for same sex marriage, though she dont agree with... now that is a Gov not for herself but for the people.
And then, conservatives--who are always in favor of "states' rights", as opposed to federal power--will gripe that this is not a federal issue.
In fact, nothing in the US Constitution would make this a federal issue. This would fall into the category of powers that are "reserved to the states".
Read the Constitution again if you don't believe me.
Anyway, I stand by my statement that our esteemed governor makes his decisions based on what will play well with a conservative national audience.
Wrong, this is def a Federal issue if gays need to be treated equally in every State and on a Federal level.
Marriage is unique between a man and woman, I don't want anything to make it less unique. I am not that religious, and I am not married. I'll say it again: I support civil unions, that is fine, but same-sex marriage is not meant to be.
who are you and betamale to say what love is especially when you two are full of hate. if you're a hater, you don't have the right to tell anybody what love is.
and you call yourself smart too yet you can't even explain yourself. you're busy worrying about gay marriage ruining the "sanctity of marriage" yet you can't explain to me or anybody in this thread what's up with all these couples making a mockery out of marriage. i never people like you cry about how all these couples get divorced, are busy cheating on their partners and the whole nine. what's your point? don't talk to me about the sanctity of marriage when heterosexuals kill it daily and people like you sit around and justify it and then turn around and say a man and a man can't be married if they love each other. marriage is about two consenting parties that love each other getting together to make a lifelong committment.
it's not a problem to you because they're straight and straight couples can reproduce kids yet most pregnancies aren't planned. you probably weren't even a planned pregnancy yourself and were probably made out of wedlock. what about the people that chose not to have babies, the women that get their tube tied or ovaries are messed up and the guys that get vasectomies and etc. do they have more or less a right to get married since they can't or don't want to reproduce any kids? you are not smart. change your screenname and smarten up.
All of the serious fiscal issues that face this state, issues that effect ALL citizens, and this is what the Senate and Assembly want to focus on?
Now?
Why not when McGreevey and Corzine were in charge? It would have been a shoo-in.
What a charade.
McGreevy was busy bobbing for skin flute and playing rump wrangler at the rest stops on the NJ Turnpike and corzine was busy embezzling billions of dollars.
I honestly dislike Christie and his policies. However, my impression is that by himself he wouldn't mind passing gay marriage. Unlike folks like Rick Santorum, he doesn't care one way or another. But probably after consulting with his supporters and donors, he concluded that he better veto it, if he wants to run for office in the future. Just my 2 cents.
I will never understand why these people feel they have the right to determine who can love who. What is wrong with you people? I must imagine this is probably the same thing that happened back in the day when black people were the targets, or when women wanted to vote. Nobody has the right to judge anybody else.
Nobody is telling anyone who they can or can't "love".
You cannot compare this to the equal rights struggle.
The issue here is not whether two people can love each other. It's not even whether they can be assured equal protection and rights under the law. Both of these issues in NJ have already been resolved(see civil union definition and free will definition).
The issue here is over a word, Marriage. That's it. Personally I think people should be able to call their union with each other whatever the hell they want so I'm all for gay "marriage".
My last word on the subject is this....I'm okay with civil unions and all of the benefits OF marriage for gay couples.
I am NOT for them changing the definition of marriage.
They just need something to complain about.
Live with it or get back in that there closet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
