N.J. Bill: Rights for Gays, Siblings

[MasterWolf1]

Conservative groups in New Jersey are pushing a proposal that would grant the rights of marriage — but not the title — to gays, siblings and others involved in domestic partnerships.

The plan comes in reaction to a landmark Supreme Court ruling last month that said gay couples in New Jersey should have access to the same rights and benefits as married couples. Whether to call those rights marriages, civil unions or something else was left up to lawmakers.

Under the conservatives' plan, rights would be available to gay couples, relatives and other twosomes who are not eligible to marry, said Len Deo, president of the New Jersey Family Policy Council. Unrelated opposite-sex couples, who can legally marry, would not be eligible for the designation.

For instance, a brother and sister who live together would be able to register under what supporters call an "equal benefits" bill. That way, one sibling could be covered under the other's employer-sponsored health insurance, and the survivor would not be taxed on inheritance if the other died.


Making the law broad would avoid something distasteful to many conservatives — elevating the relationships of same-sex couples to the same legal status enjoyed by married couples.

"We're going to vigorously oppose civil unions if it raises up to marriage without the m-word," said John Tomicki, president of the New Jersey Coalition to Preserve and Protect Marriage, a group of clergy, scholars and conservative groups.

Steven Goldstein, executive director of the gay rights group Garden State Equality, said the measure was a long shot to pass and, if it did, would not satisfy the state Supreme Court's requirements.

"It's a red herring for anti-gay vitriol," Goldstein said.

The plan is one in a wide range of options lawmakers have to consider. Conservative groups also are backing a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as being between only a man and a woman.

Some lawmakers, backed by gay civil rights leaders, are pushing for full marriage rights — and the name — for gays. Gay rights activists say that it's important for them to be able to call their unions "marriage" because everyone understands what that term means, unlike "civil unions."
Key lawmakers in the Democratic majority in the Legislature say they favor letting gay couples register in civil unions that would offer all the benefits of marriage but not the title. Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts Jr. has said action may be taken by the end of the year.

State Sen. Gerald Cardinale, one of the most socially conservative members of the Legislature, said he would support an "equal benefits" law because it does not discriminate against people who are not gay.

[adam613]

Hi Masterwolf. Here is the latest on the NJ gay situation. (Sadly I live in NJ.)
(And no I think CNN is a disgusting news organization but they had the latest wire on the gay situation in NJ.)

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Facing pressure from the state's top court, the New Jersey Legislature voted Thursday to give gay and lesbian couples the rights and privileges of marriage, while using the term "civil unions" to describe the partnerships.

The vote in the General Assembly was 56-19. The Senate vote was 23-12. Gov. Jon S. Corzine has said he would sign a civil unions bill into law.

Steven Goldstein, director of Equality New Jersey, told Bloomberg that the vote was a mixed blessing for the state's gays and lesbians because there was no guarantee non-government entities would honor the decision.

"Nobody knows what civil unions are in the real world. That's the problem,'' Goldstein told Bloomberg. "We want marriage equality, not a law that discriminates.''

The move follows an order by the New Jersey Supreme Court, which directed the state to provide same-sex couples with marriage rights or their equivalent.

Employing civil rights terminology, gay and lesbian advocates blasted the decision and said that providing the benefits of marriage without calling it marriage was tantamount to the "separate but equal" treatment of a discriminated group.

Conservatives have steadfastly opposed legislation that suggests same-sex relationships are equivalent to marriages between men and women.

If Corzine, a Democrat, signs the measure into law, New Jersey will become the third state behind Vermont and Connecticut to OK civil unions. Massachusetts also recognizes rights for same-sex couples, and is the only state to use the term marriage.

The federal government recognizes neither same-sex marriage nor civil union, meaning same-sex couples do not receive federal marriage benefits such as Social Security.

According to the New Jersey bill, two people who enter into a civil union "shall have all of the same benefits, protections and responsibilities under law, whether they derive from statute, administrative or court rule, public policy, common law or any other source of civil law, as are granted to spouses in a marriage."

Adoption and hospital visitation are covered under that definition.

In October, the state Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that New Jersey could not discriminate against same-sex couples by excluding them from the benefits of marriage. It gave the state 180 days to rectify the situation through legislative action.

"By passing a law that marks same-sex couples as inferior, the government has paved the way for others to discriminate against them," said David Buckel, marriage project director at Lambda Legal and lead attorney on the Lewis v. Harris marriage lawsuit that led to the court's decision.