Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register

What State Could Be The Next Marriage Equality Battleground?

This image is from: What State Could Be The Next Marriage Equality Battleground? · «Back to article

This image is from: What State Could Be The Next Marriage Equality Battleground? · «Back to article

    • gaym50ish

      I think it’s significant that the last time the referendum process was used in New Jersey was in 1915, when the all-male electorate voted to deny voting rights to women. Could there be any better illustration of why civil-rights issues should not be put to a popular vote?

      Nov 12, 2012 at 6:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ZacharyG

      As much as i would love to see Mississippi on this list, I really think that it will take a federal mandate to force it here. I just can’t see Mississippi repealing it’s amendment banning marriage equality it passed in a knee jerk reaction years ago. Anyways, I guess I will just have to keep on suffering in this backwards state.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 8:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scottevill

      “God knows how much money the Koch brothers, the Mormon Church and Sheldon Adelson can put together to poison the airways with their hate,” ponders pro-equality Sen. Raymond Lesniak.”

      I’m not for a referendum in NJ, either, though I think we would win it, but Raymond Lesniak needs to do his homework and not just spew talking points. The Koch Brothers, loathsome as they may be, actually SUPPORTED marriage equality in New York so it’s a good bet their buy-in could be gotten in NJ as well.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 8:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mpls770

      Dark horse winner in this race could be Minnesota. We just beat our anti-marriage amendment, and the election gave both houses to the Democrats for the first time in 25 years. Governor Dayton is a staunch support of our cause as well, which means we have the votes and the signature to get a repeal of our DOMA law passed. We’re in a unique position in that instead of a law then a referendum as other states have done, MN may end up doing it backwards! Legislators have been making veiled comments to the media about “keeping the momentum going” and “continuing the discussion about marriage.” The general feeling is that we will get something passed in the next legislative session.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 8:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • deltabadhand

      I’d like to see my state, Pennsylvania on this list too, but don’t have much hope. If Jersey and Delaware go for marriage equality, we’ll be the odd man out in the Northeast.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 11:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • just as good as you

      I’m guessing Rhode Island. It’s the only state in New England without marriage equality.

      And, House Speaker Gordon Fox has announced plans to call a vote on gay marriage when lawmakers return in January. This sounds very promising.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 11:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • just as good as you

      @ZacharyG: Don’t “suffer”. Go get legally married. You CAN, you know. Neither New York nor Canada has any residency requirements to get legally married. Admittedly, your State might not acknowledge it, but the moment the mis-named “Defense” of Marriage Act gets repealed, you’ll be eligible for those 1,176 Federal “effects that flow from marriage”.

      (And to Hades with Haley Barbour. ;{O)

      Nov 12, 2012 at 11:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • brent

      @gaym50ish: How do you define civil rights? Is the right to own a gun a civil right? If you don’t put it up for a vote how do you decide it?

      Nov 12, 2012 at 1:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • brent

      @scottevill: If the Koch brothers support gay marriage then how are they loathsome?

      Nov 12, 2012 at 1:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • shevmonster

      It’s really unfair that we should have to wage referendum battles just to get the same basic rights everyone else takes for granted, but life isn’t fair and it’s a waste of time whining about it. In states were we can enact it legislatively, we should do it that way. In states where we need to go to a ballot, we should do it that way. Sure, the Supreme Court should read the constitution as treating all people as equal and give us our rights today because justice delayed is justice denied, but ultimately, the cry babies who are against freedom and equality won’t have anything to cry about when we win our rights through the legislative and ballot process, and we won’t spend decades reeling from a national backlash the way abortion rights groups have done.

      We as a community need to be willing to stick our necks out and do the hard work and live with the painful process of getting our rights up on the ballot and fight for those rights. It is a horribly difficult process, but what we accomplished on November 6 was earth shattering. We may want to wait for the next presidential election in most cases so that we get the benefit of high voter turnout, but I really think we need to fight it out this way to really win and win convincingly.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 1:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • shevmonster

      @just as good as you: That is actually incorrect. The federal government determines whether you are married by whether the state wherein you reside considers you married. If the Supreme Court finds DOMA Section 3 unconstitutional, then same sex couples who live in states with same sex marriage will get the federal benefits. Same sex couples living in states without same sex marriage will not get the federal benefits. DOMA section 2 is the part of DOMA that says that states do not have to acknowledged same sex marriages from other states as an exemption from the full faith and credit clause of the constitution. There are lots of exemptions from the full faith and credit clause so it is unlikely the Supreme Court would find it unconstitutional, and, moreover, none of the cases before the Supreme Court are even looking at Section 2 of DOMA. If you want to be married under federal law, you’ll need to live in a state with marriage equality, until and unless the Supreme Court finds a constitutional right to marriage equality under the 14th Amendment.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 2:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • bobydkd

      On 11/19/2012 add California (again). SCOTUS will announce it will not hear the Prop 8 appeal.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 2:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jniceny

      **“God knows how much money the Koch brothers, the Mormon Church and Sheldon Adelson can put together to poison the airways with their hate,” ponders pro-equality Sen. Raymond Lesniak.**

      The Koch brothers are not philosophically against marriage equality.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 2:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • just as good as you

      @shevmonster: I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

      Currently, as you point out, the mis-named “Defense” of Marriage Act establishes a “one-way, anti-federalism” in that it allows the several states to dictate Federal policy. When it is overturned, the Federal Government will be free to register all legal marriages. Those marriages done in New York are perfectly legal. It is the home states’ refusal to acknowledge their legality that will likewise be found Un-Constitutional. And I’m sure there’ll be a few (more) lawsuits before the dust gets settled.

      Is Section 2 simply one of those lawsuits in waiting perhaps? (Especially in light of the self-exemption from the FF&CC?)

      Wasn’t the FF&CC what caused all states to be required to recognize inter-racial marriages after the Loving decision?

      Thanks for your input.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 3:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • just as good as you

      @jniceny: But their tens of millions of dollars support anti-equality politicians, so their “philosophical” view is moot.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 3:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JOHN 1957

      Many a face broke when all the monies they poured into their hopeful Mitt Romney campaign came to naught. Simple solution, if you don’t believe in gay marriage then don’t get one. Live and let live and don’t impose you ignorance on the world. You are not allowed to me who I can love and who I can marry when I have to pay dues on every level like everybody else. Double standards eventually come back to bite people in a hurtful place.

      Nov 12, 2012 at 8:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Freddie27

      Whenever SCOTUS announces in late November that it will not be hearing the Prop 8 case, because the suit only deals with California, then the Golden state can resume with same-sex marriage. I predict Rhode Island, Minnesota and Delaware legislatively legalize same-sex marriage in 2013. Illinois is surprisingly conservative, I predict it fails to pass there. Hawaii could also be a dark horse, as the constitutional amendment there doesn’t ban gay marriage, but simply allows the legislature, not the courts to define it. Even if there were another referendum, I predict we win in a state that voted over 70% for Obama. I’m all for a referendum in New Jersey, as we would win it. I know civil rights shouldn’t be up for a vote and all that, but let’s not cut off our nose to spite our face. I predict Oregon votes it in 2014/16 and it passes in Illinois and New Mexico by 2016. Then 2016-2024 will be dominated by getting swing states to pass it: Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Nevada. Then hopefully the Supreme Court will intervene b4 we have to convince the South.

      Nov 13, 2012 at 10:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.




    Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.