| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Native American" |
| Date: |
15 Jun 2005 07:12:19 AM |
| Object: |
NJ Appellate Court Upholds Ruling Against Same-Sex Marriage |
NJ Appellate Court Upholds Ruling Against Same-Sex Marriage
By Alexa Moutevelis
CNSNews.com Correspondent
June 14, 2005
(CNSNews.com) - A New Jersey appellate court Tuesday upheld a lower court
ruling that same-sex marriage is not protected by the state's constitution.
The Superior Court of New Jersey's Appellate Division ruled two to one, with
Judge Stephen Skillman writing that the "plaintiffs' claim of a
constitutional right to State recognition of marriage between members of the
same sex has no foundation in the text of the Constitution, this Nation's
history and traditions or contemporary standards of liberty and justice."
Skillman found that homosexuals already have the right to marry, as long as
the marriage is not to a member of the same sex. "Plaintiffs, like anyone
else in the state, may receive a marriage license, provided that they meet
the statutory criteria for marriage, including an intended spouse of the
opposite gender." Therefore, the judge stated, the rights of homosexuals are
not being abridged.
Judge Anthony J. Parrillo, concurring with Skillman, explored the difference
between "the right to marry and the rights of marriage". The DPA gives
same-sex couples the rights of marriage, Parillo wrote, but the
qualifications for the right to marry are decided by the state,
qualifications that include the presence of one man and one woman in the
marriage.
In his dissent, Judge Donald G. Collester argued that "the right to marry is
effectively meaningless unless it includes the freedom to marry a person of
one's choice."
Last year, New Jersey passed the Domestic Partnership Act (DPA), which gave
many benefits previously only available to married heterosexual couples to
same-sex couples.
However, "absent legislative action, there is no basis for construing the
New Jersey Constitution to compel the State to authorize marriages between
members of the same sex," Skillman concluded in his opinion, which upheld
the Superior Court of New Jersey's Law Division of Mercer County.
Parrillo added that any constitutional right for homosexual marriage should
"come from democratic persuasion, not judicial fiat."
http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200506\CUL20050614b.html
--
"Liberals, socialists and marxists - the triad of stupidity."
.
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: NJ Appellate Court Upholds Ruling Against Same-Sex Marriage |
15 Jun 2005 10:00:21 AM |
|
|
"Native American" <NativeAmerican@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:DWUre.4683$eM6.4579@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
NJ Appellate Court Upholds Ruling Against Same-Sex Marriage
By Alexa Moutevelis
CNSNews.com Correspondent
June 14, 2005
(CNSNews.com) - A New Jersey appellate court Tuesday upheld a lower court
ruling that same-sex marriage is not protected by the state's
constitution.
The Superior Court of New Jersey's Appellate Division ruled two to one,
with
Judge Stephen Skillman writing that the "plaintiffs' claim of a
constitutional right to State recognition of marriage between members of
the
same sex has no foundation in the text of the Constitution, this Nation's
history and traditions or contemporary standards of liberty and justice."
Skillman found that homosexuals already have the right to marry, as long
as
the marriage is not to a member of the same sex. "Plaintiffs, like anyone
else in the state, may receive a marriage license, provided that they meet
the statutory criteria for marriage, including an intended spouse of the
opposite gender." Therefore, the judge stated, the rights of homosexuals
are
not being abridged.
Common sense prevails, even in a liberal state like New Jersey. This is a
very good sign.
Judge Anthony J. Parrillo, concurring with Skillman, explored the
difference
between "the right to marry and the rights of marriage". The DPA gives
same-sex couples the rights of marriage, Parillo wrote, but the
qualifications for the right to marry are decided by the state,
qualifications that include the presence of one man and one woman in the
marriage.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Native American" |
|
| Title: Re: NJ Appellate Court Upholds Ruling Against Same-Sex Marriage |
15 Jun 2005 10:07:29 AM |
|
|
--
The Democrats are pursuing the philosophy of the stop sign, the agenda of
the roadblock, and our country and our children deserve better.
"Dana" <whoya@whoya.com> wrote in message
news:11b0ggp55gh8712@corp.supernews.com...
"Native American" <NativeAmerican@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:DWUre.4683$eM6.4579@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
NJ Appellate Court Upholds Ruling Against Same-Sex Marriage
By Alexa Moutevelis
CNSNews.com Correspondent
June 14, 2005
(CNSNews.com) - A New Jersey appellate court Tuesday upheld a lower court
ruling that same-sex marriage is not protected by the state's
constitution.
The Superior Court of New Jersey's Appellate Division ruled two to one,
with
Judge Stephen Skillman writing that the "plaintiffs' claim of a
constitutional right to State recognition of marriage between members of
the
same sex has no foundation in the text of the Constitution, this Nation's
history and traditions or contemporary standards of liberty and justice."
Skillman found that homosexuals already have the right to marry, as long
as
the marriage is not to a member of the same sex. "Plaintiffs, like anyone
else in the state, may receive a marriage license, provided that they
meet
the statutory criteria for marriage, including an intended spouse of the
opposite gender." Therefore, the judge stated, the rights of homosexuals
are
not being abridged.
Common sense prevails, even in a liberal state like New Jersey. This is a
very good sign.
Yes. As various posters have pointed out in these newsgroups, those who
choose to engage in homosexual behavior are NOT being "discriminated
against", because, as the judge also recognized, they are free to marry a
person of the opposite sex, same as everybody else in America.
The militant homosexuals are full of sh*t, and thankfully even the courts
are starting to say so.
.
|
|
|
| User: "parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: NJ Appellate Court Upholds Ruling Against Same-Sex Marriage |
15 Jun 2005 10:27:49 AM |
|
|
"Native American" <NativeAmerican@earthlink.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:RuXre.4757$eM6.2659@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
--
The Democrats are pursuing the philosophy of the stop sign, the agenda of
the roadblock, and our country and our children deserve better.
"Dana" <whoya@whoya.com> wrote in message
news:11b0ggp55gh8712@corp.supernews.com...
"Native American" <NativeAmerican@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:DWUre.4683$eM6.4579@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
NJ Appellate Court Upholds Ruling Against Same-Sex Marriage
By Alexa Moutevelis
CNSNews.com Correspondent
June 14, 2005
(CNSNews.com) - A New Jersey appellate court Tuesday upheld a lower
court
ruling that same-sex marriage is not protected by the state's
constitution.
The Superior Court of New Jersey's Appellate Division ruled two to one,
with
Judge Stephen Skillman writing that the "plaintiffs' claim of a
constitutional right to State recognition of marriage between members
of
the
same sex has no foundation in the text of the Constitution, this
Nation's
history and traditions or contemporary standards of liberty and
justice."
Skillman found that homosexuals already have the right to marry, as
long
as
the marriage is not to a member of the same sex. "Plaintiffs, like
anyone
else in the state, may receive a marriage license, provided that they
meet
the statutory criteria for marriage, including an intended spouse of
the
opposite gender." Therefore, the judge stated, the rights of
homosexuals
are
not being abridged.
Common sense prevails, even in a liberal state like New Jersey. This is
a
very good sign.
Yes. As various posters have pointed out in these newsgroups, those who
choose to engage in homosexual behavior are NOT being "discriminated
against", because, as the judge also recognized, they are free to marry a
person of the opposite sex, same as everybody else in America.
Babs, you're repeating yourself. You know very well that this is
discrimination. Besides, why do you care so much about people's sexual and
PRIVATE life?
Do you really want a government checking what happens in your bedroom?
The militant homosexuals are full of sh*t, and thankfully even the courts
are starting to say so.
Insults, generalizations, lies... Yup, that's our Babs... Still full of *****
as ever!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
