Box Turtle Bulletin

Nearly half of all Americans live where there is some recognition of same-sex couples

About 5.1% of Americans (15.5 million) live in areas in which same-sex marriages are legal and equal to opposite-sex marriages: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, and the District of Columbia.

Another 58.4 million (19.2%) live in states which have either civil unions or domestic partnerships that offer all the rights and protections of marriage without the name: California, New Jersey, Oregon, Nevada, and Washington. To that we can add two more states (New York and Maryland) in which the local state government will honor marriage occurring elsewhere and we have a total of 32.6% of Americans living with the rights and responsibilities of marriage available to their family.

There are also five states which recognize same-sex couples and offer them limited itemized rights. They are Hawaii, Colorado, Wisconsin, Maine, and Rhode Island and they add an additional 14.2 million Americans (4.7%).

But recognition does not stop there. There are dozens more counties and cities who provide what local recognition and benefits as they can, adding another 14.2 million local residents (4.7% of Americans) who can appreciate that their city officials see them as a couple. Local municipalities include the populations of Salt Lake City, UT; Phoeniz AZ; Tuscon AZ; Duluth, MN; Minneapolis, MN; St. Paul, MN; Lawrence, KS; Columbia, MO; Kansas City, MO; St. Lewis, MO; Ann Arbor, MI; Cook County, IL (Chicago); Urbana, IL; Cleveland, OH; Cleveland Heights, OH; Toledo, OH; Philadelphia, PA; Pittsburgh, PA; Harrisburg, PA; El Paso, TX; Travis County, TX (Austin); Eureka Springs, AK; New Orleans, LA; Carrboro, NC; Chapel Hill, NC; Clarke County, GA (Athens); Fulton County, GA (Atlanta); Broward County, FL (Fort Lauderdale); Key West, FL; Miami-Dade County, FL; and West Palm Beach, FL.

In total about 140 million Americans – about 46% of the nation’s population – live where there is some form of official notice of same-sex couples. So NOM can proclaim “victory” when they have an election in California or Maine, but this ball is rolling and the momentum is in the direction of recognition.

Equality NJ is going back to court

On October 25, 2006, the Supreme Court of the state of New Jersey unanimously found that the constitution of that state requires that same-sex couples be provided with all of the rights, benefits, and responsibilities as heterosexual married couples. But by a 4 to 3 split they allowed the state to determine the method by which to provide equality.

The state legislature opted the next month for civil unions.

However, civil unions have not provided New Jersey’s same-sex couples with all of the rights, benefits and responsibilities as married couples. This was determined in a study and, more importantly, conceded during today’s debate by the opponents of marriage equity.

So Equality New Jersey is going back to court to ask the Judiciary to force the legislature to provide full marriage. (Blue Jersey)

With today’s vote in the state Senate, the New Jersey legislature defaulted on its constitutional obligation to provide same-sex couples in New Jersey equal protection, as unanimously mandated by the New Jersey Supreme Court in 2006. That’s why we at Garden State Equality are here with our partner Lambda Legal, which has an extraordinary track record of advancing LGBT civil rights in the courts.

Now our organizations will announce major news. Our side is going back to court to win marriage equality.

Several of the senators who voted against marriage equality have pledged to “fix” civil unions. Marriage supporters doubt that separate but equal can be fixed.

If one of the four justices is convinced that only marriage can remedy the inequality, then marriage may come to New Jersey.

Marriage Equality Sleeps With the Fishes In NJ

As Timothy reported, it’s over for now.

New Jersey votes on marriage equality

Today the full New Jersey Senate voted on a bill to provide the same legal protections, responsibilities, and recognition to same-sex couples that it offers to opposite-sex couples. As expected, the full Senate voted against marriage equality 20 – 14. To pass, the bill needed 21 votes, seven more than it received.

(for the record, Sen. Teresa Ruiz nearly brought me to tears)

What this means in practical terms is that New Jersey will not have marriage equality for the four (or eight) years of Chris Christie’s governance. Or, I suppose, until two thirds of the senate is committed to marriage and can overturn a veto.

However, we finally have a tally of those who believe in equality under the law and those who believe that our lives, our relationships, and our citizenship are inferior to their own. I’ll bring you the roll call once I know it.

It is quite likely that support for the idea of marriage in New Jersey will continue to grow. At some point I think it likely that the no vote of some Senators today will cost them their career.

Let’s try and make that sooner rather than later.

NJ Senate to vote on marriage equality on Thursday

NBC is reporting:

There will in fact be a vote on gay marriage in the lame duck session of the New Jersey state legislature on Thursday, NBCNewYork.com has learned.

“We’re gonna post the bill and see what happens,” Senate President Dick Codey told us.

Codey is skeptical that it can pass. But even a failed vote will tell us which legislators believe that our relationships, our lives, and our citizenship are inferior to their own.

NJ Senate may vote on marriage bill on Thursday

Time is running out for a vote on Marriage in New Jersey. From On Top magazine

Democratic Senators Loretta Weinberg and Raymond Lesniak have asked Senate President Richard Codey, a Democrat from Essex, to hold a floor vote on the bill Thursday.

Realistically, we probably don’t have the votes to enact marriage equality in New Jersey this year. But if we do get a vote, we will know which Senators believe that our rights, our relationships, our loves and our lives are inferior to their own. And we will know who we should oppose in upcoming elections.

NJ marriage bill uncertainties

In an effort to prop up support for marriage equality, the supporters of New Jersey’s marriage bill pulled it from the Senate a few weeks back and sent it to the House for a vote.

On New Years Eve, the House chose to kick it right back to the Senate without a vote (NJ.com):

A bill to legalize gay marriage was dealt a major setback yesterday when the state Assembly speaker tossed it back to the Senate, leaving the measure in limbo as supporters and opponents watch time run out for it to become law.

Speaker Joseph Roberts (D-Camden) said he would call a vote on the measure only if the Senate approved the bill first. That sent the bill’s Senate sponsors scrambling to get a vote scheduled before Gov. Jon Corzine leaves office. His successor, Gov.-elect Chris Christie, has said he will not sign a same-sex marriage bill.

There are only two days in the lame duck session in which the State Senate will to meet and vote. As yet, the bill is not scheduled.

I want a vote.

Even if we lose, as in New York, we need to know who believes in equality and who thinks that gay relationships are inferior.

Because really that is what this entire issue is about. All of the language given by any opponent of marriage equality, no matter how supportive they might otherwise be, illustrates that they oppose equality because they don’t believe that our relationships, our families, our love, is equal to theirs. They believe that we are inferior.

And I want to know exactly who it is that thinks that we are inferior.

NJ Republicans call for strengthening civil unions law

It may seem odd to point to a statement by Republican legislators stating that they will vote against marriage equality as evidence that we have won the argument in New Jersey. But it is what they added which convinces me of the inevitability of equality. (NJ.com)

In an effort to solidify opposition to gay marriage legislation currently pending in the state legislature, five Senate Republicans today said they will be supporting the civil union law and work instead to make sure it is enforced.

Senate Minority Leader Tom Kean (R-Union) along with Sens. Chris “Kip” Bateman (R-Somerset), Jennifer Beck (R-Monmouth), Sean Kean (R-Monmouth) and Andrew Ciesla (R-Ocean) asked for Democratic senators to join them, saying it’s “unlikely that a bill redefining marriage can pass the Senate.”

“Moving testimony in Senate hearings suggests that New Jersey\’s civil union law is not always understood or followed,” Kean said in an email statement. “We need to educate the public about the law, and enhance it if necessary so that no civil union partner is turned away from the hospital bed of a loved one.”

I am not so cynical as to say that these legislators are motivated purely by political machination. In reality, some of them have decent records on gay issues and they probably all of them genuinely wish for gay couples to be able to achieve full civil equality.

But they are politicians. And, as such, they know a convincing argument and the shift of popular opinion when they see it. And they know that it is becoming increasingly evident that the current status of recognition for same-sex couples in New Jersey is inadequate in the eyes of the electorate.

These politicians do not want to enact marriage equality at this time. Perhaps they fear primary challenges or the rage of national anti-gay conservative activists (such as happened to Dede Scozzafava). Or perhaps they personally cannot bring themselves to view the relationships of gay people as truly being comparable to the relationships of straight people. But clearly they know that the only way to deny marriage equality is to offer a compromise position.

And this has been the strategy now for several years. Offer a substitute, a lesser status, an alternative. But looking at the alternatives offered over the years tells us that we’ve won the argument.

When Hawaii offered a handful of reciprocal benefits in 1997, it was generally seen by the public as adequate. California’s 1999 Domestic Partnerships were revolutionary. Vermont’s 1999 Civil Unions resulted in nationwide outrage.

Since that time, Civil Unions have become the fall-back position. “No, not marriage”, say reluctant legislators, “but I can support civil unions”.

Now New Jersey Republicans have upped the ante. Their fall-back position is Super Duper Civil Unions. But surely they can see, as I can, that eventually there is nothing left to fall back on.

Marriage equality is coming.

If they really cared about Ocean Grove…

Anti-gay activists may be on the verge of losing another argument… by winning it.

Anti-marriage activism has no legitimate intellectual principle from which to argue. Appeals to tradition, religion, and “the children, the children” may sound compelling in an emotional TV ad, but they are simply cover for the fact that there is no logical reason that equality under the law should be denied to gay people other than animus.

So anti-gay activists tell stories, tales, and myths to portray gay people as aggressors and good God-fearing church folk as their helpless victims. Of course, they make strategic adjustments to their stories – what an objective observer might call “lying through their teeth” – but they try to keep at least a kernel of truth so that they can’t be accused of just making poop up.

One of the favorite stories that anti-gays like to tell is that of a church in New Jersey that lost its tax exempt status because it wouldn’t conduct gay marriages.

Here’s the tale from the Manhattan Declaration:

In New Jersey, after the establishment of a quasi­marital “civil unions” scheme, a Methodist institution was stripped of its tax exempt status when it declined, as a matter of religious conscience, to permit a facility it owned and operated to be used for ceremonies blessing homosexual unions.

And from the National Organization for Marriage’s infamous “gathering storm” ad:

“I am part of a New Jersey church group punished by the government because we cannot support same-sex marriage.”

In fact, you’ll hardly find a litany of imagined aggrievances that anti-gays chant that does not have some version of this tale. Of course, none of them tell the truth.

The facts are that the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association owns a small beachside town in New Jersey. Although Ocean Grove has many areas that are restricted for religious use, for decades the beach, the boardwalk, and a pavilion have been open to the public.

As part of the state’s Green Acres program, those who make their land open to all residents get special property tax benefits denied to other property owners. And so those areas that were public use (but not the private religious property) had received exemptions.

However, when the Association decided that the pavilion was a religious building that could only be used for heterosexual ceremonies, and not gay ceremonies, they no longer qualified for the exemption and the pavilion lost its special status. While the beach and the boardwalk remained privileged and received preferential treatment, the pavilion was treated like the rest of the Association’s property.

But all of that could change.

An added provision to the proposed New Jersey marriage equality bill would exempt churches, and church-affiliated organizations like the Camp Meeting Association, from having to provide services to same-sex couples. And further, it bars the state from punishing those religious organizations that so discriminate.

Which means that the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association could return to making their pavilion open to wedding ceremonies for everyone – Hindus, Muslims, Wiccans, Atheists, and Methodists – everyone except gay folk.

And you know what? I’m OK with that.

So here’s an offer to all of those anti-gay activists who have been telling the world that they are all so so so so very concerned about the Methodists in New Jersey: Support the marriage bill and you can get your ‘special rights’ back for the Ocean Grove pavilion. And we won’t even complain about it.

Fair enough?

What do you say?

UPDATE: The language of the section is as follows. The amendment starts at 1b.:

5. (New section) 1a.1 No member of the clergy of any religion authorized to solemnize marriage and no religious society, institution or organization in this State shall be required to solemnize any marriage in violation of the free exercise of religion guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution or by Article I, paragraph 4 of the New Jersey Constitution.

d. Nothing in this act shall be construed to limit the effect of section 2 of P.L.1979, c.428 (C.18A:35-4.7).

NJ Senate Marriage Vote Postponed

The New Jersey Senate vote on same-sex marriage scheduled for Thursday has been postponed until the bill can be heard by the state Assembly Judiciary Committee. The blog Blue Jersey saysthat this postponement is a good thing — the votes aren’t there yet in the full Senate for it to pass. The votes are there in the Assembly, but Assembly speaker Joe Roberts doesn’t want to schedule a vote until it passes the Senate, which is seen as the more difficult House for this issue.

Legislators are working against a January 18deadline, which is the last day Gov. Jon Corzine (D) will be in office. Corzine has said that he would sign a same-sex marriage bill into law. Incoming governor Chris Christie (R) has promised to veto such a measure should it reach his desk.

New Jersey marriage vote delayed

The vote on marriage equality in the New Jersey Senate was scheduled for tomorrow. It has been delayed. (NJ.com)

Sens. Ray Lesniak (D-Union) and Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen) said the bill — which was up for passage on Thursday — instead will likely be introduced in the Assembly Judiciary Committee in preparation for a vote by the lower house.

Meanwhile anti-equality Democrats are getting pressured.

Lawmakers said phones in their district offices continued to ring off the hook this week, with in-state and out-of-state opponents and advocates burning up the lines of Democratics senators committed to opposing gay marriage.

“Most of us have spent the last week, even just alone in our district offices fielding questions and speaking to folks, advocates and detractors of the gay marriage bill about this issue,” said Sen. Jeff Van Drew (D-Cape May), who said he will vote against the bill.

As this debate plays out across the nation, I am finding that for me this is becoming less of a “agree to disagree” issue.

I am no longer willing to accept as a credible position that I am inferior to other citizens, that my rights are not equal to thiers and I am not qualified to determine to whom I should be married.

I no longer see this as “a slowly shifting cultural perspective”. I no longer find that “good people just haven’t gotten there yet”. I can no longer accept that others have “their own moral beliefs which have to be respected.”

There are no credible arguments that argue in favor of a need for discrimination against gay couples. This has become abundantly evident in the debates in the New York Senate and the New Jersey Judiciary Committee. Those who opposed equality either did so silently – I suspect shamefully – or couched their objection in the language of bigotry.

Opponents of equality are left with nothing more than an appeal to their own religion, their own biases, or those of their constituents. No principled objections are made because none exist.

After all of the fiery denunciations of the homosexual agenda and pleas for “the children”, after all of the lobbying and praying and faith-based lying through their teeth, after all has been said, this simple truth remains: Either you believe in equal rights for all citizens or you do not.

Senator Jeff Van Drew does not.

Bruuuuuuuuce!

A statement from the Boss:

Bruce Springsteen performing in Buffalo, NY Nov. 22.

A BRIEF STATEMENT FROM BRUCE
Like many of you who live in New Jersey, I’ve been following the progress of the marriage-equality legislation currently being considered in Trenton. I’ve long believed in and have always spoken out for the rights of same sex couples and fully agree with Governor Corzine when he writes that, “The marriage-equality issue should be recognized for what it truly is — a civil rights issue that must be approved to assure that every citizen is treated equally under the law.” I couldn’t agree more with that statement and urge those who support equal treatment for our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters to let their voices be heard now.

Marriage passed by NJ Senate Judiciary

The bill now goes to the full New Jersey Senate on Thursday.

NJ Senate Judiciary Committee vote on marriage equality

UPDATE: (9:18)

With 25 opposed and 70 supporters, Sarlo thinks they’ve heard everything they need to hear so far and is asking only to speak if you have something truly new. Every Senator seems to agree; additional testimony will not change outcome of vote.

They’ve voted to “end debate”. Which is odd… that means that not only is testimony over, they will go straight to a vote.

Now to procedure:
(it’s a bit hard to hear)

Baroni’s amendment to protect religious associations is accepted as friendly; Weinberg the bills sponsor seconded the amendment.

Weinberg amends her own bill to remove the exemption for fees.

Amendment presented by Cardinale to have the bill go to the public before becoming effective. Motion to table amendment – motion is tabled (5 – 3) and will not be voted on.

Motion to move the bill (end discussion and amendments).

Senator Cardinale argues that people should write wills, advance directives, and all sorts of legal documents in order to take care of problems. “We don’t need to go to marriage to cure the problems of civil unions.”

He thinks that there are studies about “consequences” to children of same-sex marriage. He thinks there’s some study in France.

He believes that the use of the term marriage will promote a lifestyle. He doesn’t believe that all gay folks have chosen to be gay but some have chosen a path. This bill will encourage more to choose that path and he doesn’t think its good for society.

He argues that Corzine is legally still the governor but not morally empowered to make reaching changes. He’s lost his mandate.

Kyrillos, Cardinale, & Beck vote no. Bateman votes no but if the bill fails on Thursday he will join a bipartisan effort to try and fix the problems with civil unions.

Baroni says it’s all about balance – balancing religious protections against gay couples. Equal treatment at law is not too much to ask. He is the first NJ lawmaker to say this about marriage equality: “I vote yes”. The crowd applauds.

Sen. Weinberg applauds Sen. Sarlo (as have many others). She votes yes.

Sen. Stack can’t think of a better day. He votes yes.

Smith and Scutari left “yes” votes. This (with the Lesniak and Gill votes) now assures that this bill will pass.

Lesniak votes yes.

Sen. Gill lectures Bateman telling him that there’s no way to fix civil unions. Rather long windedly. No, very very long windedly. Now she’s talking about 3/5ths of a person and women’s right to vote.

As an African American and as a woman, this is a civil rights struggle. She knows the community that identifies with her wants her to take a difference stance, but she believes in a constitution.

She votes yes.

Sen. Girgenti commends everyone. But this bill “changes the fundamental definition” of marriage. It’s a “major cultural change” He votes “no”

Chairman Sarlo votes “no”.

UPDATE: (8:49)

Tom and Betty Wyka support bill. The bill can’t change their relationship one bit. They are involved in scouts and the Catholic Church.

There was never a choice about his heterosexuality.

The point is all about fear, it’s the language of fear. Be courageous.

Heidi Yehman (?) supports bill. She’s Baptist from a long line of Baptist preachers.

Senator Sarlo wants to bring the bill to a vote tonight so he’s encouraging folks to be brief. They aren’t.

UPDATE: (8:34)

Thomas Proehl – NY law school. Trustee bar association.

No one says that this law is working. And the hearing were fair.

Senator Cardinale just effectively called him a liar. WOW

And Cardinale is suggesting that there those with civil unions who don’t want them elevated to marriage. And we’re doing them a disservice.

Senator Gill apologizes to Proehl for him being called a liar.

Jeff Gardiner, neighbor of Senator Sarlo, on the board of Blue Jersey. Lived and worked in most every county.

If you don’t pass this, we’ll be back every year until we are equal.

Naomi Collier, attorney and mother.

In an interracial marriage. Its the same hatred and confusion then as now.

UPDATE: (8:02)

Some child is speaking. You can read her testimony here.

Some guy whose name I missed: Nothing is more damaging than not having a father in the home. Never ever has marriage been defined as other than a faithful union between a man and a woman.

Sodomy is not a sexual union! Wow, ranting homophobia. Do they think this is a winning argument? Yet this got applause.

Dr. King vehemently opposed same-sex rights. Huh?

Senator Cardinale was very impressed with an argument made in some article about why man-woman marriage is a gold standard. And this gold standard deserves preferential treatment.

The moral problem we have with civil unions is that is attempts to set up a similar relationship.

Oh wait. I think this is Brian Brown, from National Organization for Marriage. He’s an articulate speaker but his homophobia is not hidden.

We oppose the “march towards marriage” not the benefits. If given absolute power… yes, he would not repeal civil unions but open it up to “any two individuals” like his grandmother and himself.

Doug Tewen (?), a pastor. Several hundred people signed a petition.

More scripture quoting.

We didn’t create the term marriage so its important. It belongs to faith based belief groups (other than those whom they dislike, of course).

More John Adams quoting.

Laurel Lavaris (?) – Don’t discriminate against her by not allowing her to define marriage for the state.

Speaker from Garden State Family for Moral Values, some Jewish group. Reading quickly and mumbling.

Bill would spiritually decimate Jews, Christians and Muslims.

It’s harmful to religious to live in society that disagrees with them, I think.

Catholic Charities in Massachusetts lost its license to provide adoption. (completely untrue)

What would happen to a child turned over to two adult homosexuals? Think about it.

This isn’t tolerance, it’s barbarism. Barbarism!!

The next guy is boring and I don’t know what his name is. He’s rambling on about speeding. His “analogy” is completely nutty. He’s like the crazy uncle that has an opinion.

Next guy, didn’t get his name. He’s carrying bolts and nuts. Just in case we need a physical illustration of f*cking. You can’t hold marriage together with two nuts or two bolts.

Michael Donnely (?) from Hamilton NJ. It’s silly to pretend that assigning a word to the “condition of their living” is going to end prejudice. Only the call of God can do that.

You have a problem with God. But God is in the constitution.

Marriage is predefined. Thousands of years ago.

The people here don’t represent the entire state. It’s baloney to say you’re elected to do what is right.

The citizens of New Jersey want to vote.

UPDATE: (7:27)

Supportive ministers are done speaking. Now a bunch of “family” groups are speaking. As is the rule of thumb, any organization with the word “family” in their name oppose gay families and any group with “truth” in the name will speak anything but.

Rambling woman (Dr. Rain?) refuses to discuss bill and just was asked three times to make a point. Her lies:

A lifestyle wrought with promiscuity and disease. Average age “much too young”. Over 100 partners. Marriage would raise the cost and jeopardize the financial health of the family.

Ocean Beach Methodist lost its tax exemption (simply not true).

Carolee Adams – Eagle Forum sings the praises of Tea Party groups. Insists that legislators should listen to the Tea Party protesters.

These folks are incapable of saying “gay”. They are compelled to say homoSEXual.

You should laminate your health power of attorney and carry it with you. It’s a simple solution.

Responding to a gay kid who was attacked for being gay: we know about those who are suicidal because they’ve lost the love of their life. Children are harassed for being over weight or having buck teeth.

Some Minuteman woman: equality means we all get to vote on this issue.

Loretta Yin a member of the 14th District for Traditional Marriage: not identifying the divine origin of marriage reveals an anti-religious bias. That’s just bat-poop crazy.

Amendments [provided to protect religious groups] don’t protect religious freedoms because these amendments can be changed.

The choice to behave in sexual conduct is something that can be controlled by government.

Man from same group. we know from prison studies that homosexuality is a learned behavior and a choice.

He goes on to ramble about how Jesus defined marriage by banning divorce. I don’t think that’s going to influence Senator Weinberg.

Len Deo, NJ Family Policy Counsel – oh wow, when I heard his voice I thought it was a woman, probably an ex-lesbian. Deo’s group was the one that Carrie Prejean was scheduled to speak at the night after her sex tapes were disclosed (Huckabee filled in).

Why were there not more complaints filed about violations of civil unions?

Gregory Quinlan – ah, here’s the ex-gay.

Regarding bigotry imposed on people of faith by homosexual community.

Crystal Dixon fired from university for anti-gay rant in newspaper. We are marginalizing people of faith.

Does this bill protect people like me?!? Quinlan, a PFOXer, is very aggressive.

The Assembly of God minister apparently left.

UPDATE: (6:54)

A whole host of ministers are speaking in support of marriage equality. As one asked, “why can’t I conduct the marriages that my church supports?”

Lutheran minister: This is an issue of religious liberty.

Unitarians, Methodists, Episcopalians, Friends (Quakers), and Jews also speaking in support.

UPDATE: (6:23)

Knights of Columbus opposes marriage equality. And although he’s pretending that he supports civil unions, all his arguments are blatantly homophobic. “Our children will be taught that homosexual lifestyle is as good as heterosexuals. They’ll teach that homosexuality is normal. And it’s NOT!”

You know, I’d believe these folks who come and say that Civil Unions are quite good enough… if they hadn’t opposed them when they came up.

I want to ask this guy – and the Bishop who spoke earlier – one question: Have there ever been, are there now, or will there ever be ANY instance in which the Catholic Church has supported ANY increase in ANY rights to ANY same-sex couples in ANY venue in ANY place at ANY time?

The KOC speaker also proved that I am an amazing seer. As I predicted, the determination by the court that Boissoin was entitled to his vile ranting would not stop anti-gays from using him as a martyr.

UPDATE: (6:01)

Episcopal Bishop endorses the bill: Marriage traditionally was not between a man and a woman. Rather it was a contract between two men, a father and a groom.

UPDATE: (5:55)

Amazing. This rabbi is defending slavery. Biblical slavery was benevolent, you see.

UPDATE: (5:47)

It bothers me when Jews speak of “Judeo-Christian values”. That is a term created by conservative Christians primarily to co-opt Jewish authority and to speak for Jews, usually contrary to what Jews would actually say. And this rabbi just also referred to God’s relationship with humanity as similar to a husband and wife. Is this guy a messianic Jew?

But in any case, these Jews are at least honest. They don’t just oppose to gay marriage, they oppose gay people entirely.

He speaks of people who want tolerance and then acceptance and then dominance followed by their intolerance. Gee, thanks, Rabbi. But I think you need not worry about gay dominance.

UPDATE: (5:41)

An organization of Orthodox Jews is now requesting that senators oppose marriage equality. Their spokesman is reading so quickly that his testimony is unintelligible but it seems that his primary objection is that allowing gay people to marry would mean that gay people are not inferior to heterosexuals.

We’ve already heard from a few rabbis that support equality.

UPDATE: (4:54)

Sorry for being down. We are getting a lot of traffic today.

Testimony has been going on for a while. Supporters have included Julian Bond of the NAACP, a Republican legislator from Vermont, and the State Bar. Opponents have included the Catholic Church and the New Jersey Family Policy Counsel.

One amendment to exempt religious societies has been presented and accepted by the bill’s proponent as “friendly”.

At present it appears that there are at least six yes votes including at least one Republican.

UPDATE: (2:08)

The Judiciary Committee consists of:

D – Sarlo, Paul A. – Chair
D – Girgenti, John A. – Vice-Chair
R – Baroni, Bill
R – Bateman, Christopher
R – Beck, Jennifer
R – Cardinale, Gerald
D – Gill, Nia H.
R – Kyrillos, Joseph M.
D – Lesniak, Raymond J.
D – Scutari, Nicholas P.
D – Smith, Bob
D – Stack, Brian P.
D – Weinberg, Loretta – chief sponsor of marriage equality in New Jersey

Democrats outnumber Republicans 8 to 5. However, party registration appears not to be an indicator of support for or opposition to marriage equality.

(1:53) Today the New Jersey Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on the bill to provide marriage equality to their state. Testimony The Committee was scheduled to begin at 1:00 pm. Supporters and opponents are on hand to rally committee members to their cause. (NJ.com)

More than a thousand supporters of gay marriage surrounded the Statehouse today before filing into the Statehouse Annex and making a beeline for the Senate Judiciary Committee for what is expected to be a long, contentious hearing.

Families with children who are gay said they came together to show how important the bill is for them.
…
Opponents of the measure also came out in droves. A group of Hasidic Jewish rabbis protesting the bill’s passage were gathering in the Statehouse halls. A car outside the Statehouse was adorned with posters that read “No to gay marriage” and urged people to call lawmakers.

NJ Senate to vote on marriage next week

From NJ.com

“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 (Dec. 10) 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.”

There has been an expectation that marriage equality has adequate support in New Jersey to become law. However, recent rumblings suggest that some supporters may have been getting cold feet.

Let us hope that the fury unleashed on the Democratic Senators in New York who voted for discrimination will cause New Jersey elected officials to ask themselves whether they wish to be included on the “must be defeated” list.