THE  NEW  YORK  TIMES
 
  December 15, 2006
Legislators Vote for Gay Unions in New Jersey 
By LAURA MANSNERUS

  TRENTON, Dec. 14 — The Legislature voted on Thursday to make New Jersey the 
third state in the nation to recognize civil unions for same-sex couples. In 
doing so, it moved quickly to fulfill a court mandate to provide equal rights 
to gay couples but frustrated people on both sides of the emotional issue.
   
  Gov. Jon S. Corzine, who is expected to sign the measure into law, said, “I 
think we’re doing the right thing.” 
   
  In joining Vermont and Connecticut in establishing the parallel institution 
of civil unions, New Jersey shunned the option of opening marriage to same-sex 
couples. Massachusetts is the only state that allows gay marriage, and it has a 
residency requirement; some same-sex couples have married in Canada.
   
  New Jersey’s new unions, which would take effect 60 days after the governor 
gives the nod, would expand on the domestic partnership arrangements the state 
has had since 2004. Gay couples would gain benefits like adoption privileges, 
inheritance rights and the ability to take a partner’s surname without going to 
court.
   
  But gay-rights advocates continued to contend Thursday that the separate 
institutions were inherently unequal and promised to keep pushing for nothing 
short of marriage itself.
   
  “We’re planning a massive rally the day the civil union law takes effect, to 
pre-empt the idea that this is a day for celebration,” said Steven Goldstein, 
the chairman of Garden State Equality, a gay-rights group.
   
  Still, about 20 supporters of gay rights who had gathered in the gallery for 
the hourlong floor debate cheered when the Assembly voted 56 to 19 in 
midafternoon to approve the measure. They also applauded when Assemblyman Reed 
Gusciora, a Princeton Democrat, said, “The distance between nothing and civil 
unions is greater than the distance between civil unions and marriage.” 
   
  But Assemblyman Ronald S. Dancer, a Republican from Ocean County, said that 
the bill was an affront to the Bible, and that “this is one time that I cannot 
compromise my personal beliefs and faiths.”
   
  The Senate passed the bill 23 to 12.
   
  The civil union law was written under pressure, in response to a directive by 
the New Jersey Supreme Court seven weeks ago that the state grant gay and 
lesbian couples exactly the same financial benefits and legal rights as married 
heterosexual couples. 
   
  The Supreme Court gave the Legislature 180 days to decide whether gay couples 
should be allowed to marry or placed on a separate, parallel track. Both houses 
quickly settled on the civil union route, sending it through in just 10 days 
from introduction to final votes. 
   
  While the Legislature was instructed not to fall short of equality in the 
benefits it extended, conservatives lobbied to reserve the word “marriage” for 
heterosexuals, and on Thursday Republicans tried unsuccessfully to amend the 
bill to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
   
  “I believe the foundation of our state is families, marriage, one man, one 
woman,” said Senator Robert W. Singer, the Republican from Jackson who 
sponsored the amendment proposal. “Why do you want to crumble that? We’re not 
taking away anyone’s rights, just sanctifying what marriage is.”
   
  Without the amendment, the legislation leaves open the possibility of 
allowing same-sex marriage.
   
  “Give us two to five years,” said Assemblyman Wilfredo Caraballo, the Newark 
Democrat who introduced the civil unions measure. “In a year and a half or two 
years we’ll see that the world hasn’t collapsed, heterosexuals are still 
getting married and God hasn’t thrown fire and brimstone on us.” 
   
  Mr. Caraballo said proponents of gay marriage could not have pushed through a 
full marriage bill by the court’s deadline in April. 
   
  He noted that just three years ago, it was a struggle to enact the limited 
package of rights and benefits that characterize domestic partnerships. “We had 
to twist arms to get 41 votes,” he said. 
   
  But Mr. Goldstein pointed to the legislators, including some Republicans, who 
had said the civil union bill did not go far enough. “Today’s debate for civil 
unions could be summed up in two words: buyer’s remorse, for legislators who 
wish they were voting for full marriage equality,” he said.
   
  David Buckel, of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, said after the 
Senate vote, “This law hit with a dull thud.” 
   
  Mr. Buckel represents the couples whose lawsuit led to the Oct. 25 Supreme 
Court decision, in which the justices held unanimously that to deny them the 
full rights accorded married heterosexual couples violated their equal 
protection rights. He said he would consult his clients about going to the 
court again to argue that the new law does not meet its mandate.
   
  Few legislators have said explicitly that they oppose civil unions. In the 
floor debate Thursday, several Republicans raised other objections (no Democrat 
voted against the measure).
   
  Assemblyman Richard A. Merkt of Morris County contended that the Supreme 
Court had overreached, saying, “I expect once again this Legislature will 
surrender its authority as it has many times in the last 40 years.”
   
  Social conservatives had focused their efforts on retaining the traditional 
definition of marriage. Len Deo, the president of the New Jersey Family Policy 
Council, said at a news conference Thursday with Senator Singer that the civil 
union bill “moves us toward same-sex marriage.”
   
  “People have a right to rights,” Mr. Deo said, “but they don’t have a right 
to redefine an institution that’s served us well for 2,000 years.” 
   
  The New York Times Company 


 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Reply via email to