seems to be the ruling of the New Jersey Supreme Court regarding gay marriage, which has given the state legislature 180 days to provide rights to gays but left it up to that body to decide whether the term marriage should be extended to same sex couples. On the other hand, they also say there was no constitutional guarantee within the state for the right to marry, meaning it's not a protected institution for heterosexuals either, I'm assuming. The state legislature has been told that it must come up with a law giving gays all the rights and benefits accorded to those who are married, without necessarily making marriage itself legal. That means the state will likely go the route of civil unions, which is is a stumble in the right direction. The vast majority of New Jersey residents believe that gays should be able to celebrate their commitment to one another formally. But hey, they might surprise us all and go the marriage route, although I'm sure there will be a lot of protest, especially from outside the gay-friendly state.
Here in Kentucky, I'd be surprised if they get civil unions through in the next decade at least. Marriage itself is on the distant horizon of possibility. We have a state politician even now who is trying to bar state schools from giving domestic partner benefits to their employees and their families--yes families, although he wouldn't see it that way. Imagine the furor if someone tried to push marriage through.
It is my hope that one day we will look back and think, my, what a backward time, much like we do when we see pictures of 'white-only' water fountains and businesses.
No comments:
Post a Comment