The Great New Jersey Civil Rights Referendum of 2012
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:57:12 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  The Great New Jersey Civil Rights Referendum of 2012
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: The Great New Jersey Civil Rights Referendum of 2012  (Read 3678 times)
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 26, 2012, 03:28:41 PM »

It's fourth and 34. Chris Christie drops back ...

... and he punts!

Christie wants marriage equality issue on the ballot

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The move pushed State Sen. Bateman off the fence and into the "no" column, effectively killing the State Senate's chances of overriding a Christie veto.
Logged
Holmes
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,719
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2012, 06:31:32 PM »

Oh. Cool.
Logged
JohnnyLongtorso
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,798


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2012, 06:58:13 PM »

Great, another referendum that will end up a narrow loss and disappointment.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2012, 08:05:12 PM »

This would better be called the great Steve Sweeney Senate campaign of 2014.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2012, 08:54:34 PM »

Great, another referendum that will end up a narrow loss and disappointment.

I doubt it at this point. New Jersey is quickly becoming fairly solid in support for gay marriage.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 27, 2012, 01:18:53 AM »

I'd say this will pass. However is shall be used against Christie in the wake of Romney's loss.
Logged
Holmes
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,719
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 27, 2012, 08:07:39 AM »

Great, another referendum that will end up a narrow loss and disappointment.

I doubt it at this point. New Jersey is quickly becoming fairly solid in support for gay marriage.

Until the ads about how their children will learn how to have gay sex start airing. Not in my school!
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2012, 01:38:20 PM »

Great, another referendum that will end up a narrow loss and disappointment.

I doubt it at this point. New Jersey is quickly becoming fairly solid in support for gay marriage.

Until the ads about how their children will learn how to have gay sex start airing. Not in my school!

My hope would be that the side of the angels will actually bother to run some decent advertising, too. Obviously the krazens and other such creepy-crawlies will turn out against this, but they're not the only people in the state, thank God.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 27, 2012, 04:47:36 PM »

Great, another referendum that will end up a narrow loss and disappointment.

They need 3/5 in both houses to even get referenum status for an amendment. After moaning and groaning and whining about how GOP legislatures were focused on social issues its very funny to see this legislature try to push their wedge issue and insult people of faith.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 28, 2012, 03:18:19 AM »

How is this remotely insulting to anybody? The phrase 'and Religious Exemption' is even in the title of the bill, specifically for the benefit of people who follow those benighted churches that still adhere to ungodly gender determinism.

This is not a wedge issue and it is not even really a social issue. It properly belongs to the province of rights and Constitutional law.
Logged
Fuzzybigfoot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,211
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 28, 2012, 05:39:33 AM »

After moaning and groaning and whining about how GOP legislatures were focused on social issues its very funny to see this legislature try to push their wedge issue and insult people of faith.


Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: January 29, 2012, 09:16:49 PM »

How is this remotely insulting to anybody? The phrase 'and Religious Exemption' is even in the title of the bill, specifically for the benefit of people who follow those benighted churches that still adhere to ungodly gender determinism.

This is not a wedge issue and it is not even really a social issue. It properly belongs to the province of rights and Constitutional law.

Dov Hikind already answered that question.

In any case, you are correct about one thing. The various states have chosen to ensure the safety of traditional marriage via the amendment process by modifying Constitutional Text. It has worked beautifully, 31 times now.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: January 29, 2012, 10:48:50 PM »
« Edited: January 29, 2012, 10:57:23 PM by Nathan »

How is this remotely insulting to anybody? The phrase 'and Religious Exemption' is even in the title of the bill, specifically for the benefit of people who follow those benighted churches that still adhere to ungodly gender determinism.

This is not a wedge issue and it is not even really a social issue. It properly belongs to the province of rights and Constitutional law.

Dov Hikind already answered that question.

I don't care about Dov Hikind's opinion.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

In a way that violates the Federal Constitution on its face (not to mention human rights, the Kingdom of God, and the basic decency of kindness) no matter how many elderly and confused or young and spite-filled people say otherwise, yes they have. But you don't seem to care about that as long as you and yours can keep the icky Other people out of your perfect world with its tiny problems, and I suppose I should stop expecting you to. But it is very like me always to tilt against windmills, so once more I'd like to say: Stop taking advantage of other people's genuine if confused and frightened feelings to further your own petty hatreds and amoral spite. Not only will it make things better for everybody else, it'll make things better for you as well. I guarantee it.

Washington is likelier than not to extend the marriage franchise regardless of putative 'gender' this year, New Jersey moderately so, and I am afraid that at some point in your life you will simply have to deal with living in a world in which your cold, anti-human, hydraulic conception of love won't carry the political weight that it used to when it comes to issues of making other people's lives worse than they have to be so you can feel better about yourself. Sorry, but you'll have to find some other way to do that when that happens. Might I suggest learning an instrument or taking up crochet?
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: January 30, 2012, 12:44:06 AM »

Great, another referendum that will end up a narrow loss and disappointment.

They need 3/5 in both houses to even get referenum status for an amendment. After moaning and groaning and whining about how GOP legislatures were focused on social issues its very funny to see this legislature try to push their wedge issue and insult people of faith.

I don't usually do this, but:

Roll Eyes
Logged
dudehere92
Rookie
**
Posts: 88
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2012, 07:27:08 PM »

I will be voting on the gay marriage law in NJ. I support domestic partership benefits for same-sex couples, but marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman and children are best raised either with 2 parents of different gender or one parent. I will be voting no.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2012, 09:10:36 PM »

I will be voting on the gay marriage law in NJ. I support domestic partership benefits for same-sex couples, but marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman and children are best raised either with 2 parents of different gender or one parent. I will be voting no.

lol.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2012, 11:52:17 PM »

I will be voting on the gay marriage law in NJ. I support domestic partership benefits for same-sex couples, but marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman and children are best raised either with 2 parents of different gender or one parent. I will be voting no.

What could possibly make one parent better than two of the same sex, all else being equal? I ask this, you should understand, as a person who was raised by a single mother.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 08, 2012, 06:25:43 AM »

I will be voting on the gay marriage law in NJ. I support domestic partership benefits for same-sex couples, but marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman and children are best raised either with 2 parents of different gender or one parent. I will be voting no.

Are you aware that the weight of credible studies from a range of sources completely disagree with this claim?  Also, do you think we should discourage gay couples from adopting children, even if they're inferior parents (which they're not)?  Tens of thousands of children in this country age out of foster care!

And why aren't straight couples subject to the same strict efficacy tests when getting married?   It's never even really been socially taboo for infertile straight couples to marry, so why do we only start caring about this (invented) norm once gay folks want to get married?

It's just such an untenably bad policy.
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,042
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 08, 2012, 06:35:26 AM »

I will be voting on the gay marriage law in NJ. I support domestic partership benefits for same-sex couples, but marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman and children are best raised either with 2 parents of different gender or one parent. I will be voting no.

Are you aware that the weight of credible studies from a range of sources completely disagree with this claim?

Here's some legwork I did a while back, which will support your statement:

Search for "effect of gay parents on children" in Google Scholar, and here's what you'll find just on Page 1:

Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 14, 2012, 05:56:35 PM »
« Edited: February 14, 2012, 05:58:26 PM by Mr. Moderate »

The New Jersey State Senate voted to legalize gay marriage by a 24–16 margin yesterday, largely down party lines. State Senators Diane Allen (R-07) and Jennifer Beck (R-11) sided with the good guys. State Sens. Jeff Van Drew (D-1) and Ron Rice (D-28) sided with the forces of darkness.

27 votes would be needed to override a Christie veto.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.064 seconds with 12 queries.