I can't post too much today but I just read this

Updated: 06:54 PM EST
IM This E-mail This

Gay Couple Benefits Start in New Jersey
By GEOFF MULVIHILL, AP


TEANECK, N.J. (Feb. 19) - Hundreds of gay couples were granted the same legal rights, if not the title, as married couples Monday as New Jersey became the third state to offer civil unions.



AP Photo/Tim Larsen
Daniel Gross, left, holds up a Civil Union certificate with partner Steven Goldstein. Their civil union license - No. 1 - was completed on Monday at 12:09 a.m. in Teaneck, N.J.

Talk About It: Post Thoughts

More than a dozen other couples applied for licenses for ceremonies later in the week.

The civil unions, which offer the legal benefits but not the title of marriage, were granted automatically to the hundreds of gay New Jersey couples who had previously been joined in civil unions or married in other states or nations.

Couples who had not been joined previously could apply for licenses but must wait 72 hours before they can hold civil union ceremonies, the same waiting period for weddings.

Several, like Marty Finkle and Michael Plake, plan to exchange vows Thursday.

"This is as close to marriage as we're going to get for right now," Finkle said after he and Plake applied for their civil union license at the town hall in South Orange early Monday.

A few dozen friends and local officials cheered as they filled out the requisite form.

New Jersey lawmakers hastily created civil unions in December, less than two months after a state Supreme Court decision held that gay couples had a right to the same benefits as married couples.

Supporters of gay marriage say they may sue, contending that civil unions do not create the equality the court ordered. They also say they will push lawmakers to allow gay couples to marry.

Some social conservative groups, meanwhile, are pledging to block same-sex marriage by pressing for an amendment to the state constitution that prohibits such unions. Forty-five states have laws or amendments that ban same-sex marriage.




In New Jersey, a constitutional amendment requires voter approval. In polls conducted since October, state voters have said they are more comfortable with civil unions than with allowing gay couples to marry.

Among the hundreds of benefits under the civil unions law, gay couples get rights dealing with adoption, child custody, visiting a hospitalized partner, making medical decisions and getting the same access to health insurance coverage that employers offer spouses of workers. Civil union partners also now have the right not to testify against a partner in state court.

However, the federal government and most states do not recognize the unions. That means, for instance, that a surviving member of a civil union would not be entitled to his deceased partner's Social Security benefits. And if a partner is hospitalized in another state, the other may not be allowed to visit.

Only one state - Massachusetts - allows marriage for same-sex couples. Connecticut, Vermont and California have laws similar to New Jersey's, though California calls its system domestic partnerships.

Despite the Presidents Day holiday, a handful of town halls around the state opened to accept license applications for the unions. At least 20 couples applied in Asbury Park, Collingswood, Lambertville and South Orange.

Thomas Mannix and Kevin Pilla arrived at Asbury Park City Hall at about 11:30 p.m. Sunday so they could be among the first to fill out the application.

"The things being granted are long overdue and very important to have, so we wanted to take advantage of it as soon as it was available," said Mannix, a 44-year-old business analyst.

Mannix said he and Pilla would hold a simple ceremony on Thursday as part of a party sponsored by Garden State Equality, a statewide gay rights group.

They and several other couples said they were happy with the rights provided by civil unions but still want their relationships to be recognized as marriage.

Associated Press writer Wayne Parry in Trenton contributed to this article.

2/19/2007 18:26:28

This is all a moot point Mark. Our governments, local and federal, SHOULD NOT be sanctioning marriage in the first place.

All that state-sacntioned marriage does is allow the immoral re-distribution of money from people like you and me (unmarried) to married people, (especially with kids).

Example? Social Security death benefits. Mark, if your boyfriend died, even after living monogamously together for 80 years, you would get NOTHING from SS. At the same time, a guy on his SECOND, THIRD, OR HELL SIXTH marriage would get survivor benefits if his spouse died. What's THAT all about? Sounds like bullshit to me!

Another example? The earned income tax credit. Let's say you're a loser cook/dishwasher making less than 20k per year, you have no business having children right? WRONG! The government, in it's infinite wisdom says that not only will they take money FROM OTHER PEOPLE to help you pay for them (the EITC refunds MORE money than what the parent actually paid in taxes), they will give you free food, help pay your utilities, help pay your rent, all that good stuff. Oh, and why are they entitled to my (and other people's) money, cuz that loser making less than 20k per year talked some girl into spreading her legs and having a baby that they couldn't afford.

I digressed a little with the last paragrash there but I just wanted to point out that these types of absurdities are INEVITABLE when you allow governments to do "social engineering" or whatever you want to call it.

Get government out of marriage and leave it strictly with the churches, (the way it used to be) and you would never feel the need to bring up stupid court decisions like this in the first place.

good information

and ideas

thanks hauser

Post deleted by selene

Well if you're defending the ability of government to take away my hard earned money to give to other people that are deemed "more worthy" of having it, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

i think the drive through marriage of britney annulled 2 hours later

was just so beautiful and socially just. i mean - the family is stronger becuase of it.

a drive throgh marriage really generates some warm and lovely tax base feelings.

doesn't it?

sorry - even george bush in prviate knows that gay marriage is soon to be -
i am pretty sure he's for it -

the queen of england - the head of the anglican church - approved gay marriage

this is why it exists in england today -

as well as in canada -

the anglican priests - can be open about being gay - and married -
but there's no need to be since being gay - is not their job
being a priest is.

the US now is the most backward - nearly of the G8 - socially -

Gay Marriage is in:

Denmark, 1989.
Norway, 1996.
Sweden, 1996.
Iceland, 1996.
France, 1999.
Spain
Germany, 2001.
Finland, 2002.
Luxembourg, 2004.
New Zealand, 2004.
Britain, 2005.
Canada 2005
Israel
Belgium 2003

there may be more -

nm

i need to rest -