Those pesky "activist judges" and their learned application of law:
"It
is extremely disappointing that the New Jersey Supreme Court has
allowed the ruling of an activist judge to stand pending its appeal
through the court system. The definition of marriage is something that
should be decided by the people of New Jersey themselves, not by any
judge or court. New Jerseyans should have the right to vote on this
issue just as voters in nearly three dozen other states have done. In
addition, the decision to allow same-sex ‘marriage’ to proceed even
while the law is being tested in court is unfair both to the voters of
the state and to same-sex couples themselves. If the state Supreme Court
were to uphold marriage as they should do, then the validity of the
‘marriages’ that will be performed starting next week will be called
into question. Further, the decision opens the door to a possible
federal court ruling similar to what occurred in California in the Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeal which held that once a state grants same-sex
‘marriage’ rights it can never take them away. All in all, today’s
ruling is another sad chapter in watching our courts usurp the rights of
voters to determine issues like this for themselves."
—National Organization For Marriage president Brian Brown
He's got nothing. Even if there were to be a vote, New Jerseyans
support marriage equality in sizable numbers. It's highly likely that
Brian's theoretical referendum—which should never happen regardless, as
minority civil rights should not be popularity contests—would go the way
the four states where marriage equality prevailed in November 2012.
NOM is losing in every arena, in every way. That's what happens when
you choose the losing position. I tried to tell Brian years ago (way
back when he was losing in Connecticut), but he just wouldn't listen.
No comments:
Post a Comment