Yeah! They have half a brain! N.J. Supreme Court rules same-sex couples must receive identical rights; 3rd in a Series: Marriage Inequity
3rd in a Series: Marriage Inequity
Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Found at: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/25/BAGPDLVPA74.DTL
N.J. Supreme Court rules same-sex couples must receive identical rights
(10-25) 12:38 PDT TRENTON, N.J. -- Same-sex couples must receive the same rights as married couples, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled today.
In a 4-3 decision, the court found that "denying committed same-sex couples the financial and social benefits and privileges given to their married heterosexual counterparts bears no substantial relationship to a legitimate government purpose."
The court went on to say that it should be up to the "democratic process" to determine how those rights are given to same-sex couples, whether through marriage or "some other term," such as civil unions.
While the court was closely split, the dissenting justices concurred that same-sex couples are entitled to the benefits and privileges of marriage, but said they believed that the couples should be granted nothing short of marriage.
Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Found at: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/25/BAGPDLVPA74.DTL
N.J. Supreme Court rules same-sex couples must receive identical rights
(10-25) 12:38 PDT TRENTON, N.J. -- Same-sex couples must receive the same rights as married couples, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled today.
In a 4-3 decision, the court found that "denying committed same-sex couples the financial and social benefits and privileges given to their married heterosexual counterparts bears no substantial relationship to a legitimate government purpose."
The court went on to say that it should be up to the "democratic process" to determine how those rights are given to same-sex couples, whether through marriage or "some other term," such as civil unions.
While the court was closely split, the dissenting justices concurred that same-sex couples are entitled to the benefits and privileges of marriage, but said they believed that the couples should be granted nothing short of marriage.

0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home