"New Jersey senate defeats same-sex marriage bill"

This news article is about how the State Senate of New Jersey rejected a proposal that would have made New Jersey the sixth state in the nation to allow same-sex marriages. The vote ended up being 20 to 14 against the bill that would allow same-sex marriage. One man and the president of the New Jersey Family Policy Council, Len Deo, was proud of the senators and said, "We applaud the senators for upholding a time-tested institution: marriage." Deo was proud that the bill was rejected because that meant that the traditional "meaning" of marriage, meaning the union of one man and one woman would remain. He believed that gay marriage would weaken society by redefining one of its main traditions. I've heard that statement multiple times where people believe that gay marriage or allowing gays into the military would weaken society's foundation. But what I wonder, is how do they know for sure that that would happen? They can't see into the future and they will never know the outcome unless they let it happen. Until they allow same-sex marriage, they will never know if it will negatively affect society. If anything, I believe that it would improve society because a lot more people will be happy to have that privilege of being able to get married legally. The article mainly focuses on how the defeat in New Jersey, which has been viewed as one of the nation's most "socially tolerant" states, was a significant setback for gay marriage advocates. Advocates of gay marriage had hope for New Jersey, but were let down when the bill was rejected. Advocates are now hoping to take the case to the Supreme Court, hoping that the bill will pass. Another theme that seems to repeat itself in all of the articles that I've been reading, is how much determination gay activists have to never give up on achieving their rights. In article, it talks about how advocates are disappointed from the rejection of the bill, they claim that, "we aren't done fighting." There is also the theme of equality because the article describes how opponents of the bill are frustrated with the fact that voters don't have a say in whether the bill passes or not and that it's not fair because in 30 other states, voters have gotten the chance to decide. They believe that New Jersey should also have that right. Advocates of the bill, however view the case as more of a civil rights one where the decision should be made by the courts and Legislature only. Either way, gay activists will continue to strive for their rights until they achieve equality.

Kocieniewski, David. "New Jersey senate defeats same-sex marriage bill.(Metropolitan Desk)." The New York Times. (Jan 8, 2010): A18(L). Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. Deerfield High School. 10 Feb. 2010 .