I don't understand how this is a bad decision. The legal definition of marriage in New Jersey is pretty clear, and the judiciary would be overstepping its bounds if they changed it. Granting same-sex couples the same privileges as heterosexual couples is the best they can do under the circumstances, and it's certainly farther than a lot of other states are willing to go.
Well, you have a point. I guess I was stupid in not doing a ton of research into this, and shouldn't have posted it in the first place. I don't know how they managed to make it legal in Massachusetts; I assumed it would be a similar process in other states. I'm frustrated, because it feels like nothing will ever change--that this double standard will be perpetuated because people feel like it's good enough and close enough, and doing otherwise would be too much trouble. Thanks for a good lesson in Keeping My Mouth Shut.
I don't know anything, really, about the context of Goodridge, but I'm pretty sure there wasn't actually a law defining marriage in Massachusetts when they made that decision. So the decision in that case had more room to explicitly say that any solution but equal marriage rights would be unconstitutional. Every other state has to deal with the long, arduous, and frankly very boring legislative process to guarantee equal protection. Civil rights issues don't get settled overnight. But that's what the Tenth Amendment is for!
Of course, if I had my way there'd be no such thing as "civil marriage" and this wouldn't even be an issue, but I'm just a crazy libertarian.
Comments 3
http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/supreme/a-68-05.pdf
Reply
Reply
Of course, if I had my way there'd be no such thing as "civil marriage" and this wouldn't even be an issue, but I'm just a crazy libertarian.
Reply
Leave a comment