A Rose By Any Other Name - Marriage
Subscribe to our RSS Feed:
Topics
- 'Full Marriage Equality' Editorial
- Governor Christie Makes History By Politicizing the New Jersey Supreme Court
- School Bullying Results in 800000 Verdict
- Big Brother is Watching Civil Rights Abuses by Schools
- Illinois Supreme Court Overturns Damages Cap in Medical Malpractice Matters
- Why Arbitration Agreements Are Un-American
- It's Time to Pierce the Corporate Veil in Discrimination Cases
- Sexual Discrimination in Contractual Relationships
- The Truth About Who Files Lawsuits
- Of Free Speech vs. Hate Speech
- Plausibility and Common Sense DANGER
- I Didn't Sexually Harass Her But They Fired Me Anyway
- Why Mandatory Arbitration of Employment Claims Is Un-American
- New Jersey Considers Workplace Bullying Law
- Racial Harassment in Bergen County-Justice for Roberth Morales
- Third Circuit Rules It Is Illegal to Discriminate Against an Employee For Having an Abortion
- Courts Unfriendly to Employment Plaintiffs-Harvard Study
- Finally-Religious Based Harassment is Truly Illegal in New Jersey
- Corporate Greed
- Bigoted Pediatrician
- Governor Corzine Lets Down The People of New Jersey
- Racism in the Jury Box
- The McDonalds Myth
- Caps On Damages Dont Work
- A Rose By Any Other Name - Marriage
- What Workplace Harassment Says About Our Society
- The Road So Far
Recent Updates
July 7, 2010
'Full Marriage Equality' Editorial
July 1, 2010
Governor Christie Makes History By Politicizing the New Jersey Supreme Court
June 1, 2010
School Bullying Results in 800000 Verdict
May 1, 2010
Big Brother is Watching Civil Rights Abuses by Schools
April 1, 2010
Illinois Supreme Court Overturns Damages Cap in Medical Malpractice Matters
A Rose By Any Other Name - Marriage
Posted by: Kevin Costello
The NJ Supreme Court's decision in Lewis v. Harris, which recognized as fundamental a same sex couple's right to have all the benefits of marriage, was, in the classic sense, a compromise borne of cowardice.
My point is not to 'debate' same sex marriage. There is no debate. Marriage only comes in two forms: a religious ceremony, performed by a cleric, which carries no civil effect, and a civil marriage, which is the state's recognition of an economic relationship. Despite the pomp and frippery of a religious ceremony, it is the state that makes it official.
As long as no law can tell a temple whom it can marry, then it follows that no temple can tell the law whom it can marry. Any objection to same sex marriage equality is thus a religious objection. It is therefore of no consequence in or to a secular republic. Folk who are not satisfied with holding and expressing their religious beliefs within family and church and who insist that their religious values should dictate state policy should move to Iran to some other such place where religious 'values' dictate policy.
I was involved in the Lewis case. I represented one of the amicus parties, along with other counsel. We wished for more. We wished for a rose by any other name. We wanted marriage equality, and now, the battle begins again.
NJ's attorney general Rabner recently disappointed us in that effort by suggesting that NJ would 'recognize' marriages from outside of NJ as 'civil unions' only. This is, of course, an insult both to the principle, and also to those couples - and to the states from which they come - who were married where legislatures are braver.
It's 'just' a word, is marriage, but then, so is 'justice.'
JOURNEY TO JUSTICE
DISCLAIMER: This web log is not legal advice, nor should it be construed to be legal advice or the offering of legal advice. It should not be read as guaranteeing or suggesting any particular outcome in any Court will occur in any particular case. It is not, and should be read as, a complete or authoritative analysis of the state of law, which is constantly subject to change.
"Journey to Justice" - The Web Log of Civil Rights Trial Lawyer Kevin M. Costello, Esq. (www.costellomains.com).
