We have $163,080 to go in our Fall Campaign. Every penny is used to strengthen the Church. See details!
Click here to advertise on CatholicCulture.org

Let the people decide!

By Diogenes (bio - articles ) | Oct 25, 2006

The New Jersey Supreme Court sees "no substantial relationship to a legitimate governmental purpose" in restricting marriage benefits to male-female couples.

We've been down this road before: in Hawaii, in Vermont, especially in Massachusetts. But the New Jersey court, while tossing aside the immemorial wisdom of Western civilization, affects a curious new touch of humility:

The name to be given to the statutory scheme that provides full rights and benefits to same-sex couples whether marriage or some other term, is a matter left to the democratic process.

Do you get the picture? We, the judges, by a 4-3 majority, will decide what marriage means-- no matter what the voters think, or their parents and grandparents unto countless generations. But we'll let the people, and their elected representatives, decide what to call the institution we have now re-invented. So don't say we're not being democratic!

An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:

Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!

Our Fall Campaign
Progress toward our year-end goal ($163,080 to go):
$200,000.00 $36,919.72
82% 18%
Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Show 10 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: Sterling - Oct. 27, 2006 7:17 PM ET USA

    The NY Times reports on Oct 26 that Bush and other politicians are using the judicial tyrrany in NJ to cry that "Something must be done!!!" These politicians are pathetic wretches. All this time they did zilch to amend the U.S. Constitution, which would have presented this NJ debacle. Now, they're hoping to hoodwink conservatives again with their newly-remembered zeal for traditional morality. It's as if they think they are never going to die and face a just and holy God.

  • Posted by: ladybird - Oct. 27, 2006 6:09 PM ET USA

    Of course, the saddest thing is, the court holds us in contempt! We have a "nominally" Catholic governor, too! We also have been blessed with two - yeah, two! - "nominally" Catholic US Senators! They, all three, support women's reproductive rights (we know what that means!), equality in marriage (that, too!), non-discrimination based on sexual preference. How many "nominally" Catholic justices on this particular bench?

  • Posted by: rpp - Oct. 26, 2006 1:31 PM ET USA

    I hold this court in contempt.

  • Posted by: Eleazar - Oct. 26, 2006 1:05 PM ET USA

    Esalkin: It is a truly contemptible court.

  • Posted by: Eleazar - Oct. 26, 2006 1:04 PM ET USA

    The decision in NJ could not have come at a better time for Virginians. It demonstrates why a Constitutional amendment is needed. Too bad our (nominally) Catholic Governor doesn’t get it. In spite of a pastoral letter from the Bps of Richmond and Arlington, he publicly stated his opposition, as do many “catholic” writers of letters to the editor.

  • Posted by: ladybird - Oct. 26, 2006 12:59 PM ET USA

    Hear tell someone has already prepared a Bill of Impeachment of all 7 justices for presentation to the NJ legislature. Hope it is successful; but doubt it'll get far.

  • Posted by: frjimc - Oct. 26, 2006 12:17 PM ET USA

    The best idea yet would be for EVERY college student to register as a "couple" with his/her roommate, for every single working person to register as a "couple" with a co-worker, and for every senior citizen to register as a "couple" with someone from the nursing home. After all, it's merely a legal semantic. The economic impact would be devastating, and even the sycophants in the state house would finally get it. The money issue is what will finally derail this idiocy.

  • Posted by: - Oct. 26, 2006 11:39 AM ET USA

    Yes your honor, I am in contempt of this court.

  • Posted by: Laity1 - Oct. 26, 2006 12:51 AM ET USA

    name suggestion: SINGLE

  • Posted by: rpp - Oct. 25, 2006 6:24 PM ET USA

    Sick! Sick! Sick!

Fall Campaign
Subscribe for free
Shop Amazon
Click here to advertise on CatholicCulture.org

Recent Catholic Commentary

A different tone at this Synod? 11 hours ago
Church Fathers: St. Clement of Alexandria, Part I 14 hours ago
Internalizing marriage at this year's synod 15 hours ago
Gay Vatican official who 'came out' may influence Synod in a way he didn't expect--or want October 5
Another serial killer? Blame 'religious rage.' October 5

Top Catholic News

Most Important Stories of the Last 30 Days
Pope issues new rules to streamline annulment process CWN - September 8
In Cuba, Pope emphasizes service to the vulnerable, praises thaw in US-Cuban relations CWN - September 21
Pope challenges America in speech to US Congress CWN - September 24
As Synod opens, Pope calls on Church to defend ‘unity and indissolubility’ of marriage bond CWN - October 5