October 25, 2006 - 6:41pm
Press Release

Want access to post press releases? To sign up, use this form. You must be logged in.

Assemblyman Guy Gregg

GREGG: CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE VOTE OF LEGISLATURE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO BAN GAY MARRIAGE

Assemblyman Guy Gregg, who is the sponsor of a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as being only between a man and a woman, issued the following statement today in response to the New Jersey Supreme Court's ruling regarding gay marriage in New Jersey:October 25, 2006
Assemblyman Guy Gregg/973-584-5422

GREGG: CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE VOTE OF LEGISLATURE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO BAN GAY MARRIAGE

Assemblyman Guy Gregg, who is the sponsor of a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as being only between a man and a woman, issued the following statement today in response to the New Jersey Supreme Court's ruling regarding gay marriage in New Jersey:

"I am urging the Legislature to convene as soon as possible, to consider the constitutional amendment I have sponsored that would define marriage in New Jersey as being only between a man and a woman. Not only does this reflect the intent of the current law, but it also would give New Jersey voters a chance to have a voice in this matter when the issue comes to the ballot for a vote.

"In addition to this amendment we will also look into whether in light of today's ruling any additional constitutional actions may be necessary to preserve the integrity and sanctity of marriage.

"This issue is not about how we may feel personally about individuals of any sexual orientation. It is about a sacred institution which we as a government have an obligation to protect. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment."

A copy of Assemblyman Gregg's constitutional amendment bill is attached.

#####

BGUHL can be reached via email at bguhl@njleg.org.

Comments

I wonder if the Assemblyman really wants to start using the Cons


I wonder if the Assemblyman really wants to start using the Constitution to start discriminating against people? I always thought the Constitution was a way for citizen's rights to be protected, not taken away.

10/26/06 5:40 pm