After stalling on a vote in the New Jersey Senate that was supposed to go down this week, supporters of gay marriage reportedly wanted the State Assembly to first give the bill the go-ahead. Too bad; just like last week and the week before, there’s no date set for the Assembly to make a move. That shouldn’t be terribly surprising, given the Assembly’s lawmakers haven’t shown much interest in passing gay marriage thus far. But as we see continued hedging from Democrats, it begs the question: Why so coy? Are these folks afraid of their re-election campaigns with a “yes on gay marriage” vote on their record? Or are they so fearful of incoming Gov. Chris Christie, who’s vehemently opposed to gay marriage, that they don’t want to risk upsetting their new veto man? Or, is Christie making veiled threats to pro-gay marriage legislators? Because that’s how this game is played.
pc
Wasn’t the state advised that civil unions aren’t working out as equivalents to marriage and given 1 year to correct the situation? I remember reading something similar to this awhile back…..
terrwill
Of course Chris (bag ‘o donuts) Christie is pissed off
about this! Having to deal with ANY issue that takes
time away from snacking is gonna really tick him off!!
Ted B. (Charging Rhino)
With the already fairly-broad state-wide civil gay rights and the domestic partnership law loads of NYC and Philly gay couples are moving to our suburbs for their dog-and-white-picket-fence lifestyles. The Democrats in Trenton really don’t want gay marriage…they just want the issue to be unresolved so they can raid the GAY ATM year-after-year.
Ironically for a state wil barely any gay “culture” or gay-bar scene, Gays and Lesbians have better protections here in NJ than almost anywhere in the Northeast for workplace, private and public discrimination. By contrast, Gays in Pennsylvania and New York only have “rights” if they live or work in Philadelphia or the Five Boroughs of NYC…but not in their respective suburbs….and neither states have almost-marriage-status civil unions.
1EqualityUSA
#2 Oh.
DaveO
Oh course it’s a reason to back off marriage. If the Democratic assembly and governor deliver on marriage now, how will they continue to raise funds for Democratic candidates and ensure that the gays vote for the Democratic candidate four years from now?
Brian NJ
The democrats fail to realize that if they don’t pass gay marriage, they will anger the base — somthing they cannot afford to do. A gay person, or their families and supporters, might go and vote republican if they don’t see any difference in the parties, or any assistance for their gay loved-one. But an anti-gay rights voter will NEVER vote for a democrat no matter if they vote for gay marriage or do not. Those voters ALWAYS vote republican. So where is the real risk! The only risk is to not vote for gay marriage for a democrat.
B
No. 6 · Brian NJ wrote, “The democrats fail to realize that if they don’t pass gay marriage, they will anger the base — somthing they cannot afford to do.” … another hypothesis is that they are going to slip the vote in just before Christmas, when the assembly and senate are about to have a recess. Or they’ll put it in just before the new governor’s inauguration, so the news for that will cover up the vote (and if the governor complains loudly about it, they’ll try to spin that as proof of how hung up the Republicans are at interfering in the voters’ personal lives).
Whatever it is, I wouldn’t make assumptions when you can get more accurate information by simply waiting a month.
tjr101
How’s this Christie? I believe FAT Republicans shouldn’t be allowed to get married!
Cam
Now that the Dem’s have majorities in the Federal levels and many states, it is amazing to find out just how the talk they talked when in the minority and the walk they’re walking while in the majority differ. They are shockingly unsupportive of gay marriage now that they have the power to do something.