Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Thursday, December 3, 2009

Next Up: New Jersey

Posted by on Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:44 PM

The triumph of hope over bitter recent experience...

The New Jersey gay marriage proposal will be considered Monday by a Senate committee and could be posted for a full senate vote later in the week, state Sen. Ray Lesniak said today. "On Monday in the Judiciary Committee, we're going to vote on marriage equality," Lesniak (D-Union) said, while making the announcement to a crowd of gay marriage supporters on the Statehouse steps today.

"On Thursday the full Senate is going to vote on marriage equality," said Lesniak, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee." And God be willing, we'll have 21 votes."

New Jersey's sitting governor—Democrat John Corzine—says he'll sign the bill if it passes. New Jersey's governor-elect—Republican Chris Christie—says he'll veto any gay marriage bill that hits his desk. But this bill won't hit Christie's desk if it passes next week. It'll hit Corzine's. Christie won't be sworn in until next year. Anyway, fingers crossed. Again.

 

Comments (16) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
RugbySkin 1
I have family and friends in the State that's home to the Jersey Shore show... but I hope the bill passes anyway. And my brother's PA marriage will not be threatened in the lightest. They'll be the ones driving people there (Big car after all). And on top of it all, Charlie and Mac from "It's Always Sunny" will be able to announce and celebrate their love on a season finale.
Posted by RugbySkin on December 3, 2009 at 4:15 PM
devilsmoke 2
Any word on definite yes/no votes for this one? I had heard early on that the NY senate was going to be a tough one (has any republican senator/assemblyperson/representative *ever* voted for marriage equality?) but I've heard almost nothing predicted about NJ. The NJ senate has a better (23-17) Dem majority than NY; but then again, 8 of the 32 Dems in NY found it necessary to cower under a 'no' vote...
Posted by devilsmoke on December 3, 2009 at 4:17 PM
Loveschild 3
"New Jersey's sitting governor"

Correction:

New Jersey's exiting governor/

Governor Corzine had plenty of ample time to take on gay marriage during his tenure but now that he doesn't need to be accountable to the people of NJ he is planning on imposig this as his little going away FU gift to them, along with the hep of a lame-duck legislature.

The people of NJ rejected him for a reason.
Posted by Loveschild http://www.samaritanspurse.org/index.php/articles/responding_to_haiti_earthquake/ on December 3, 2009 at 4:19 PM
The Amazing Jim 4
Do they make wedding cake toppers with 2 pumpkin-orange grooms in white tuxedoes and "blow-out" hair styles?
Posted by The Amazing Jim http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/profile.php?id=100000076496291&ref=profile on December 3, 2009 at 4:35 PM
Jason Eckelman 5
@3 - Wrong again! NJ voters rejected him because he used to work for Goldman Sachs, everybody in NJ fucking hates Wall Street banker-types right now, so they took it out on Corzine. Your stunning ignorance about literally every topic you comment on never fails to blow my mind. Unlike a stopped clock, you're not even right twice a day. It would be funny if it weren't so fucking pathetic.
Posted by Jason Eckelman on December 3, 2009 at 4:58 PM
6
@3 -God forbid you ever take an action in favor of marriage equality as actual support. Are you really that delusional that you think everything is just a conspiracy?
Posted by Wondering Intently on December 3, 2009 at 5:05 PM
very bad homo 7
Forgive me if I don't get my hopes up just yet.
Posted by very bad homo on December 3, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Mr.Designer 8
#5 is right. Corzine was punished because of a poor economy. If I'm correct, he only gets paid a $1 a year too. I voted for Corzine but he lost.

I was at a Garden State Equality rally for marriage equality today in Trenton NJ. There was a huge emphasis on making gay & pro gay clergy visible to senators and assembly people. Apparently they are always surprised to see religious leaders (a bishop was there) supporting gay marriage.

There didn't seem to be too much opposition. There were about 10 Jews there and 6 Christians discussing Jesus, I didn't see any others. Of course the news and media made it look like there were at least 70 Jews on TV and the media seemed to really focus on them and interviewed them...from what I noticed.

I hope chanting, singing, rallying, and being visible to the lawmakers makes a difference.
Posted by Mr.Designer on December 3, 2009 at 5:20 PM
9

I don't get it. How come every single Republican in this country votes no on this issue? Is there some threat that their republican status will be taken away if they cross partisan lines? Surely some of them must agree with the argument in favor of rights. Why are they are forbidden to act on it? What the fuck is that all about? Has politics truly become this divisive?
Posted by alisamc http://amcstubbornturtle.blogspot.com/ on December 3, 2009 at 10:04 PM
Telsa Grills 10
Sloggers: no bit of gay marriage legalization actually "hurts" Loveschild and her ilk. None of it ends up with her losing anything, being physically compromised, or being emotionally compromised.

Discuss.
Posted by Telsa Grills on December 3, 2009 at 10:06 PM
kim in portland 11
Only her self absorption and pride will suffer. But, she stands to gain a more compassionate and a life less filled with fear.
Posted by kim in portland http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/11/fast-paced_video_provides_a_fu.html on December 3, 2009 at 10:26 PM
12
I really hope this passes. For all of the obvious reasons, but also because it might make New Yorkers rethink their decision. I mean, it's one thing to deny a minority their rights, but to be more behind the times than JERSEY? We New Yorkers wouldn't stand for it.
Posted by TenrSinger on December 3, 2009 at 11:15 PM
kk in seattle 13
NJ: Vindicate Vito Spatafore!
Posted by kk in seattle on December 4, 2009 at 1:03 AM
14
ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz............
Posted by O 4 31 on December 4, 2009 at 7:22 AM
15
Richard Codey, the Dem senate leader in NJ, flat out answered "no" when asked if he had enough votes. He said it would be closer than NY. I think this is more a case of getting the senators on record, not gaining marriage equality.
Posted by Bruno71 on December 4, 2009 at 9:54 AM
TheFang 16
I've called my state senators again today, I've got a lot of hope in my state. We've already got civil unions and that passed with out any major problems. Plus, a legislative committee officially said that civil unions weren't equal or anywhere close, and so they needed to be changed...
Posted by TheFang on December 4, 2009 at 5:59 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy