civil unions set to begin in New Jersey....AND we still won Congress...holy shit!!

[k_jerome]

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17868509&BRD=1697&PAG=461&dept_id=44551&rfi=6

[ronnykmarshall]

1. My god ... how did THAT happen?

[Bluebear]

2. I'm still waiting.

For those who said this would "cost us" the election to apologize. :eyes:

[JackBeck]

4. You're not alone.

Please, I would even accept a collective, designated represenative to say "we were wrong. we're sorry". But no one hahas had the guts to do so since before teh mid-terms.

[Ignacio Upton]

11. I was one of those posters

I was worried about even a sneeze costing us the election. However, gay marriage and civil unions did not strike a chord with as many voters in 2006 as it did in 2004, thankfully. Sorry for overreacting, and I'm glad that NJ finally got this on the books.:)

[Bluebear]

20. Thanks IU

[JackBeck]

21. Thanks, Ignacio.

Hopefully more will have the courage to join you in your apology. It was a time of chaos for all of us, but when you get accused of losing an election before it even happened, I hope you understand why many in our community were feeling defensive.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

5. Yeah, I'm still waiting for that apology, too.

We'll never get it.

[Parche]

7. Night at the Apolo gy

Jimmy Swaggart:
"Us Right wing constipated conservatives apologize to the good Liberal Americans, for we have Lynne Sinned"

[David Zephyr]

3. And even won the Senate seat in New Jersey, too!

Could all of the cowards in the Democratic Party have been wrong?

Could all of those at the DU who said gays should "wait" be wrong?

Oh, my goodness!

[dsc]

13. I'll be honest

I was worried about NJ. Menendez appeared weak, very weak, and I thought just about any wind would blow him over. I am glad it didn't turn out that way. I also felt Lautenburg was in trouble too so I should have figured this out.

[donco6]

6. Apology? Ha! Ain't gonna happen.

But we remember who you are.

[k_jerome]

8. man, i can really see how this stuff gets so much attention here.nt.

[TlalocW]

9. So what natural disaster/ill fate awaits New Jersey

According to Pat Robertson? Tidal wave? Earthquake? Meteor?

TlalocW

[kiahzero]

15. I'm hoping he doesn't say anything at all.

After all, every time he sics a natural disaster on an area, it hits Virginia Beach instead, and I'm far too close for comfort to that region.

[k_jerome]

22. ? nt.

[kiahzero]

23. Last time he directed a hurricane somewhere was Isabel.

He wanted it to go somewhere to attack a state that was overly human to homosexuals, and instead it made a beeline for Virginia Beach.

[mondo joe]

10. Good for NJ!!! I used to be more absolutist and felt I would hold out only

for marriage. While I think that remains the only just option, I have softened on civil unions. Too many gay couples are at risk to deny them whatever security a CU grants them, while we continue to fight for legal equality.

[pnwmom]

12. The other thing is that, legally speaking,

a gay "marriage" in Massachusetts carries no more weight than a "civil union" in NJ or VT. Both types of unions convey all the rights under the state laws. Neither conveys any rights under Federal law.

I hope that as more and more states approve civil unions, the general public will realize that the sky isn't falling and the next step -- to full Federal marriage equality -- will soon follow.

[pnwmom]

14. We MIGHT have had a different situation in NJ if the court there

had decided to order the state to immediately allow gay "marriage" -- Massachusetts style -- right before the election. There's no way to know.

I'm glad that everything worked out as it did. The court decided that GLBT people had the right to form unions with exactly the same benefits and responsibilities as marriage. (Insofar as was possible -- Federal law is still unchanged.) But they left it up to the legislature to determine whether those unions be called "marriage" or something else.

Presenting the legislature -- and the people -- with a choice reduced the opposition, IMO. As opposed to the situation that might have occurred if the Court had issued an immediate mandate for marriage.

[kiahzero]

16. It was a cowardly move on the part of the court, though.

"Civil unions" are still unconstitutional. Just because no court has the guts to say so doesn't make it any less true.

[pnwmom]

17. The constitution in NJ is not the same as the one in Massachusetts.

And, as I recall, the judges' opinion seemed reasoned, given the wording of the NJ constitution. People in NJ can work to amend the Constitution, which would solve that problem. But the bigger problem is that a "marriage" in Massachusetts means nothing more than a "civil union" in NJ. Both carry full rights from the states, and none from the Federal Government. So the more important push, IMO, is to get the Federal government to recognize GLBT unions.

[kiahzero]

18. When I say unconstitutional, I mean unconstitutional.

The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex by the United States government, and through incorporation in the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, this prohibition extends through to the States. The language of the New Jersey and Massachusetts constitutions are immaterial.

[Cerridwen]

19. Congratulations! New Jersey.

Wait, wait, you tacked left and still got a Democratic majority? No, no, that's not possible. We have to appease the 'centrists'! You're going against 'conventional wisdom'! How could you?!

Lots 'o /sarcasm there.

Congratulations! New Jersey.