NEW JERSEY :D

[trusting_fool]

Yay. :)

I don't care what you call it; I care about having all the same rights as marriage, and that is exactly what the ruling demands. I'm not a fan of the inequality in what they're calling it (marriage for straight couples, civil union for gay couples), but at least the court is requiring that all the same rights be given. And the three

Comments

[__downthathill]

While this is a step in the right direction, but it's definitely not enough. It's not ok to have separate names - separate but equal, anyone? The thing I'm worried about is people giving up on the movement after a minor victory (NJ decision) - what happens is that dominant forces of society give minor concessions to minority groups to a) fracture the movement (into those who think the NJ decision is enough & those who don't) and b)knock out the steam in the movement (people are inherently politically apathetic unless they're provoked/directly impacted). This is why de facto racism still exists despite victories in the courts/legislatures. Ultimately, this may be better than the status quo in the short run, but it might be worse in the long run. This is precisely why I'm so depressed about politics/the world. There's no way to alter the system in the long-run b/c short-run efforts will always be co-opted. The only real alternative is to break down the system, but critical theorists are vague about how to actually do this, and I don't think anarchy is a viable solution.

[__downthathill]

in other words, the pessimism in debating on the negative has finally completely gotten to me, so now I'm a full-pledge cynic. yay? kinda makes you wonder what I'm doing studying public policy if I sincerely believe that none of it will amount to anything actually beneficial for the world. Then again, I've given up on the labels of "good" vs. "bad" - the world just is. impossible to make it better or worse.

[trusting_fool]

I agree about the separate names deal. The argument for sepsarate names is that "marriage" is a religious institution, so really, marriage on the legal level should be abolished and everyone should just have civil unions. Marriage should be left up to churches. But that's a lot of steps to take all at once, and while it might hurt in the long run, it might also help to know that the ENTIRE supreme court of New Jersey supports gay rights.

[__downthathill]

True true that too much would lead to counter-mobilization from the religious right. Pretty much...too much = bad, too little = bad. Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

[avidelecteur]

You're optimistic today.

[daitryk]

You mean 4/7ths of the Supreme Court of New Jersey? :P

[trusting_fool]

4/7ths of the Supreme Court of New Jersey supports civil unions with all the same rights as marriage for gay couples.
3/7ths of the Supreme Court of New Jersey won't settle for anything less than calling it marriage.

[wanderingdavi]

"Racially segregated schools, are inherently unequal" does not cross over in to marriage issues as well as you might imagine. Personally I don't support state endorsed gay marriage in exactly the same way that I don't support state endorsed straight marriage: in both cases, it's none of their business. That said, if the breeders are going to have it, than the fags should get it too.

Now that I've offended anyone offendable, allow me to actually make my point.

A public education is not something quantifiable. Sure, you can give standardized tests, but those always have a bias (specifically towards people from the same cultural background as the test authors) and you can't show how it's directly impacting an individual student. With marriage issues, you can. If you define Civil Unions as "exactly like marriage, except for same sex couples" then any law that changes the way marriage is treated by the state will also affect Civil Unions, and if it doesn't, that would be easily demonstrable and therefore would be ordered to change by judicial review.

A public education? Sure, you can put the same amount of money in to each school, but you can't control where donations go, and you can't easily make meaningful quantifications about the quality of facilities. Even today, as much as we don't like it, predominantly black schools are not as well funded, and DEFINITELY not as well endowed as predominantly white schools in the same region.

FURTHERMORE, in this case, since equal protection will be afforded, in another 10 years when everyone sees that the sky has in fact, not fallen, if someone really cares about the title they're likely to be able to get the law changed again either under judicial review, or just by the legislature.