Historic Senate Vote on Gay Marriage Expected Today

BY  |  Monday, Feb 13, 2012 8:17am  |  COMMENTS (8)

Photo: Garden State Equality website.

Hundreds of gay rights activists are expected to show up in Trenton today in support of a marriage equality bill that will come up for a vote — and is expected to pass — the NJ Senate. The Assembly will vote on the issue on Thursday.

Meanwhile, Gov. Chris Christie, who has vowed to veto any gay marriage bill, will be conducting a town hall meeting in Caldwell, starting at 2:30 p.m.

The vote in the senate could take place as early as noon. Garden State Equality has advised activists to get to the State House early.

On its Facebook page, Garden State Equality answers the question of why the vote is important, even if there is a veto.

THE QUESTION WE KEEP GETTING ASKED no matter how many times we post on it. What happens after Governor Christie vetoes the marriage equality bill? First, let’s pass the bill – do not take that for granted! We have got to keep our eyes on the ball. If the bill passes both houses this week, we will have until the end of the legislative session, January 2014, to override. This week, it’s about 21 votes in the Senate and 41 votes in the Assembly. Let’s take one step at a time, methodically and strategically, and we will win equality.

Garden State Equality’s Steve Goldstein told the Star Ledger that this week in Trenton was like “the World Series, the Super Bowl and a Barbra Streisand concert all wrapped up in one.”

Cast your vote here:

Related Posts:

8 Comments

  1. POSTED BY Bill Courson  |  February 13, 2012 @ 10:12 am

    Those who oppose marriage equality now are the same as those who opposed the right of mixed race couples to wed in the 1960′s. They’re not necessarily good Christians, nor social conservatives nor traditionally-minded (although, coincidentally, they may be those things). But history will not record them as defenders of tradition nor of family values; rather, history will record them as enemies of human equality, freedom and happiness. And science wil ultimately judge them ‘diseased.’

  2. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  February 13, 2012 @ 11:12 am

    It bothers me that not one of the men who are running for POTUS supports same-sex marriage, including President Obama. And if they do in their hearts and mind but won’t come out and take a stand for it because of political reprisals, that is even more reprehensible.

    As a conservative, I am very familiar with our mantra of “less government.” But many conservatives draw the line at same-sex marriage when it comes to less government. Let’s keep the government out of our bedrooms AND out of our choice of who we decide to marry.

  3. POSTED BY herbeverschmel  |  February 13, 2012 @ 12:00 pm

    No reason for marriage licensee in first place. Only reason they were to keeps whites and black from marrying.

  4. POSTED BY DagT  |  February 13, 2012 @ 12:36 pm

    I agree with you Mrs M. What’s even worse is Gov Christie’s promise to veto this bill and his wish for the public to vote on citizens’ private lives. I simply don’t understand so called intelligent people taking this kind of position.

  5. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  February 13, 2012 @ 12:37 pm

    I do see the reason behind the licenses. If your partner should die or become unable to make decisions due to illness, you have legal recourse as to any property jointly owned, children, etc. But as to who you choose to marry? Should not be an issue.

  6. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  February 13, 2012 @ 12:43 pm

    DagT: I am not sure what’s behind Christie’s motives, either. Is it religious or political, or a little bit of both?

  7. POSTED BY DagT  |  February 13, 2012 @ 12:59 pm

    It may be both. If it’s religious then his views shouldn’t effect his governing. If its political then he and all the other politicans lack courage IMO. I hope for this issue to go to the Supreme Court. Same sex marriages legal in one State are not recognized in others. When a same sex married couple move to an unfriendly State their marriage and all their legal rights are gone.

  8. POSTED BY wendyf  |  February 13, 2012 @ 5:03 pm

    I have many wonderful clients and close friends who have been in monogamous realtionships for many years, (more than many of my straight friends), are contributers to the community and aren’t allowed the same health, tax benefits as those of us who are “allowed” to be legally married. It’s time.

Leave a Reply

Baristanet Comment Policy:

Baristanet has specific guidelines for commenting. To avoid having your comment deleted -- or your commenting privileges revoked -- read this before you comment. Violators will be banned from commenting.

Report a comment that violates the guidelines to comments@baristanet.com. For trouble with registration or commenting, write to comments@baristanet.com.

Commenters on Baristanet.com are responsible for all legal consequences arising from their comments, including libel, infringement of copyright or actions that threaten a third party. By submitting a comment, you agree to indemnify Baristanet LLC, its partners and employees from any legal action arising from your comments.

In order to comment on the new system, you need to register a new Baristanet account. To get your own avatar next to your comments, sign up at Gravatar.com

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Featured Comment

More liberal lunacy. And no mention of the tree ordinance? (you will no longer be in charge of the landscaping of your property). No mention of the Bike Locker ordinance rearing it's ugly head again? I imagine the pay-reaises for non-union employees is a moot issue. Given the proclivities of the incoming council, there probably won't be non-union employees much longer.

Tip, Follow, Friend, Subscribe

Links & Information

Baristanet on Flickr