| In a one-two punch giving momentum to marriage equality, the Courier Post and the Philadelphia Inquirer both endorsed the marriage equality bill on consecutive days. As the two largest, widest-read, and most influential newspapers in all of Southern New Jersey, both endorsements are notable. The Courier Post endorsement is particularly notable, as the Courier is considered to be editorially conservative and has often feuded with the South Jersey Democrats.
Senator Sweeney: you've been a fighter for working families, a progressive champion of paid family leave. Senator Madden: you've tirelessly stood up for cops, firefighters, and their families. Senator Redd: you've constantly struggled to ensure New Jersey's most vulnerable have a voice and an advocate. Senator Beach: you've made a legacy in your work fighting for New Jersey's veterans.
Senators, you all have wonderful legacies. Now is the time to expand upon them, the time to stand at a crossroad in history and come down on the side of justice and equality. Please read these words and do the right thing. Tomorrow, please vote yes.
Courier Post:
The public reactions may be different, but the fundamental legal issue is the same: The issuing of marriage licenses is a government function. And the government, whose core principle is equal rights and equal protection for all under the law, simply cannot justify having one of its functions be available to some adult Americans and not to others. At the end of the day, offering government-issued marriage licenses to only some, and specifically saying others cannot have licenses, just does not pass constitutional muster.
So now New Jersey lawmakers are on center stage. In a few days, they may have to vote on legislation that would clearly make legal same-sex marriage in New Jersey. And they should. More accurately, we do not see how they cannot.
Using the strictest interpretation of the U.S. Constitution -- which goes to great length to extend rights to all, not to take them away -- we don't see how any group of lawmakers could rightly not sign off on same-sex marriage, whether they agree with it personally, on a moral level, or not.
Inquirer:
The New Jersey Senate should approve a bill to authorize gay marriage, and advance the cause of equality for so many of the state's citizens.
The pending vote tomorrow in the Senate is in doubt, and the Assembly has not indicated whether it will take up the question. But gay and lesbian citizens deserve that the issue be settled in their favor.
The state's experiment with civil unions was supposed to provide gay couples the same legal rights as heterosexual married couples. But too often that is not the case. Gay couples instead face questions about the extent of their civil rights. And denying them the right to call their partnership a "marriage" makes it, by definition, something less than one.
New Jersey should end this confusion and become the sixth state to certify same-sex marriages as legal. Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire have already approved same-sex marriage laws.
It is important that the Senate bill spells out that religious organizations could not be forced to sanction or participate in any gay marriage. That should help preserve a church's First Amendment right to oppose same-sex marriages and not perform them. |
