As expected from a commission stacked with same-sex activists, the Civil Union Commission issued a report last week saying that they believe civil unions are a “failure”.  What is their conclusion based on?  Seven formal complaints that have been filed with the Civil Rights Commission out of the 2400 same-sex couples who have entered into civil unions.  The complaints concern out-of-state-based companies which are regulated by the Federal Employment Retirement Security Act (ERISA) and therefore are not required to provide expensive health benefits to same-sex couples.  Activists claim there are more complaints, yet they are unofficial and unsubstantiated, including insinuations that hospitals have denied visitation – an accusation which an official from the NJ Hospital Association insists is absolutely false. 

The commission also claims corporations in Massachusetts are more likely than those in NJ to voluntarily provide health benefits to same-sex couples simply because the law gives them the title “marriage”.  This claim is completely anecdotal, as noted in an article last week on the NJ State Bar Association website.  A representative at the non-partisan Employee Benefit Research Institute in Washington DC confirmed that ERISA applies equally to all states, and that the only reason why companies in Massachusetts might be more likely to provide same-sex benefits could be the new universal health care plan offered by the state in 2006.  It requires any corporation that pays into it for their employees to provide same-sex couples with benefits according to state law.

This “commission” has wasted taxpayer time and money to move their political agenda and now they hope to highjack public dialog on civil unions by confining it to their biased report replete with emotional and anecdotal appeals.  But the real issue must remain paramount – there is still no need to redefine marriage.  Only 0.3% of all those who have entered civil unions have filed complaints.  The fact is the civil union law has succeeded in legally providing same-sex couples with all the state rights and benefits of married couples and that redefining marriage to include same-sex couples would do nothing to force federally regulated companies to provide benefits.    

On one important point, I agree with same-sex activists: There is power in the word marriage.  Marriage defines a public virtue that responsibly regulates human sexuality, brings two parts of humanity together in a cooperative and mutually beneficial relationship, and delivers mothers and fathers to their children for the proper development of the next generation – which is in the best interest of children, and the general welfare of the state. That is why we must never redefine marriage by extending the title to anyone other than one man and one woman. Same-sex proponents are asking everyone  to dramatically and permanently alter their definition of the family; to say that male and female are merely optional, not essential for marriage, family and society. Saying male and female don't really matter is harmful to all of us.
 
Redefining marriage for everyone to assuage the desires of a few individuals is not only unnecessary but it would yield far more serious repercussions for all of us.  Where same-sex “marriage” has been legalized all citizens have lost rights: parents have lost the right to stop their primary public school children from being indoctrinated about homosexuality, free speech is censored in the media, freedom of religious speech is curtailed, and business owners are sued and fined for running their business according to their deeply held religious beliefs.  In addition, marriage rates actually decline to the detriment of families, especially children; and the tax burden increases as government must fiscally provide for more broken families.

Sixty-one percent of New Jerseyans believe that same-sex couples have a right to live as they choose but they do not have the right to redefine marriage for the rest of society.  In light of this, Governor Corzine should stop ignoring the will of the people by stating he would sign legislation legalizing same-sex marriage after the November election.  Instead our lawmakers must “Let the People Decide” and put a state constitutional amendment on the ballot to preserve marriage between one man and one woman only once and for all. 

back to Editorials