October 10, 2008

Fitzgerald says judges shouldn't have intervened on gay marriage

Republican state House contender Jill Fitzgerald said she has gay relatives "who are dear to me" and who have "caused me to be very thoughtful about” the gay marriage issue, she said.

“It is a difficult situation. It really is,” she said.

Fitzgerald, who is running in the 77th District in northeastern Bristol, said there is a “cultural perception of marriage that it is between a man and a woman.”

That tradition ought to be honored, Fitzgerald said. Four judges shouldn’t be able “to make a decision for the entire population,” she said

She said the court’s ruling is “not a very sensitive way” to handle a culturally charged issue that will likely be resolved in a decade or two by shifting attitudes.

“It just makes people angry with one another” to have a battle arise over whether to extend marriage to gay men and women now, Fitzgerald said.

Fitzgerald said she would have preferred that the issue “have gone out to the citizens of Connecticut to vote on before a ruling was made.”


Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com


Anonymous said...

I have gay relatives, too, and neither one has a desire to marry their partner. They think of marriage as strictly for heterosexuals. They also think that their partnerships are nobody's damn business, judges included. The judges should not have ruled on this.

the gays are being used by the liberals said...

I agree with 5:44. The sad thing is this silly decision is sure to be debated much more. It may go to a referendum and may be overturned (as it may this year in California). Then won't all these gay "couples" be hurt more by the court's ruling? What a bunch of irresonsible, activist judges.

Anonymous said...

Tell those judges where to go. Vote for the constitutional convention on Nov. 4!