New Jersey: Just Say “Yes” To Gay Marriage, and “No” To George Berkin
An Open Letter To The Editor Of NJ.com
To The Editor:
Late Saturday night I came across an “editorial” by George Berkin, titled, “Say no to gay marriage.” I confess, my outrage was palpable, and, reading his one thousand four hundred ninety-one words of ignorance, bigotry, illogic, and just plain, old-fashioned hatred, I slept little and contemplated lots.
I decided, rather than blame Mr. Berkin for his ignorance, I should blame you. After all, you provide his platform. It’s obvious, were he actually someone of any intellect or importance, his only claim to fame wouldn’t be NJ.com – he would have a book, or a talk show, or published works elsewhere, or speaking engagements, or even a large following on Twitter! -Â something other than a column in your publication. Best I can tell, he was a reporter who got a column, which is more than honorable, yet, in this case, an obvious error in your judgment.
After all, anyone with any logic will tell you that Mr. Berkin’s words, for instance, “I love my dog, but no rational person hears wedding bells for me and Spot” are illogical, and ill-informed.
Mr. Berkin, “traditional” marriage’s self-anointed protector in the Garden State, should be the first to know that, among other things, marriage is a contract between two consenting adults. Unless Mr. Berkin can prove that his dog is equally “in love” with him, and can sign a marriage license, and it is to the benefit of society that they be wed, and his dog is of sound mind to make such a decision, and that his dog is a human being, the “man-dog” marriage argument is, as it has always been, fallacious and idiotic.
Speaking of ill-informed and just plain wrong, let’s take his statement, “So-called gay ‘marriage’ makes a mockery of traditional marriage because ‘gay’ sexual relations do not hold to the monogamous behavior that traditional marriages hold to, or strive for.”
Really?
How would Mr. Berkin know what “gay sexual relations” “hold to or strive for?” The fact is that there are millions of gay Americans who desperately want nothing more than a monogamous relationship, “til death do we part.” One that is recognized equally by the state and equal to all other marriages. You can put me down as one.
But perhaps Mr. Berkin thinks that all those “traditional” marriages that are troubled by infidelity are OK. Most recently of note, Tiger Woods’ marriage. Senator Ensign’s. Governor Sanford’s. Oh, so very many more.
But back to you, the Editor. How can you in good conscience allow lies and mis-information to be published, as opinion or not, under your masthead? Mis-information, like Berkin’s statement, “…researchers found that more than 40 percent of homosexuals said that they have had more than 500 sexual partners. Only 1 percent had fewer than four sexual partners.”
Well, those “researchers” are the “Family Research Council.” Any credible scientist or researcher will tell you that those studies are just plain fiction and without merit – and long since disproved. It does your readers and the citizens of your state a true injustice and disservice for you  to allow those lies to be published in NJ.com. Shame on you!
Then there’s his flat-out lie: “…so-called gay “marriage†would destroy religious freedom, because churches would not be allowed to act on traditional (or biblical) standards of sexual conduct.”
(At this point, one is forced to ask if Mr. Berkin is willing to include the decades of priest sexual abuse of children as “traditional (or biblical) standards of sexual conduct?”)
And then there’s this “gem” from your columnist:
“…if a gay marriage law goes into effect in New Jersey, pastors across the state could face legal sanctions if they preach the clear meaning of the text. The sanctions will likely be cast in terms of ‘anti-discrimination’ laws.”
The only way a gay marriage law would force “pastors across the state [to] face legal sanctions if they preach the clear meaning of the [bible’s] text” is if they also somehow compelled their congregations into stoning same sex couples. Considering the Church’s lack of ability over the past few decades to compel their congregations to follow less-controversial tenets of the bible, such as forgoing birth control methods, I doubt any pastor who advocated stoning would be arrested, as no one who listen.
The laws of this country, right or wrong, have always supported religion’s “right” to discriminate. Same sex marriage would have no effect on the Church’s right to continue to discriminate against members of the LGBTQ community.
Therefore, “Bull,” sir, is all I have to say!
I’ve taken up enough of your time. There is a difference between publishing a wide-range of differing opinions, and publishing lies. You have, time and time again when it comes to Mr. Berkin, chosen the latter. Bottom line: George Berkin’s writings are ill-informed, illogical, and misdirected. You, as the Editor, have no business allowing him a platform to preach his hate to your readers.
Fortunately, it appears your readers are smarter than you: In this one piece, “Say no to gay marriage,” there are as of this writing, twenty-five comments; twenty-three are entirely against George Berkin. Those who believe (as I do not) that marriage should be put to a vote, would surely be voting against George Berkin.
The citizens of the fine state of New Jersey deserve better from him and from you.
God willing, I trust this week they will get it – sadly, not from NJ.com, but from the New Jersey Senate.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
Roughly 140 Environmental Protection Agency employees have been placed on administrative leave after signing a letter warning of political interference in the agency’s work—prompting critics to accuse the Trump administration of ignoring their First Amendment rights.
Calling the letter “a remarkable rebuke of the agency’s political leadership,” The New York Times reported on Monday that more than 270 EPA employees had signed the public letter “denouncing what they described as the Trump administration’s efforts to politicize, dismantle and sideline the main federal agency tasked with protecting the environment and public health.”
On Thursday, the Times reported that 144 workers had been suspended, other news outlets put the number at 139.
In that public letter, signatories said they are joining in “solidarity with employees across the federal government in opposing this administration’s policies,” and that they “stand together in dissent against the current administration’s focus on harmful deregulation, mischaracterization of previous EPA actions, and disregard for scientific expertise.”
READ MORE: ‘Stop Talking’: Johnson Suggests Jeffries Is Lying in Marathon Budget Speech
They detailed their five primary concerns, including, “Undermining public trust,” “Ignoring scientific consensus to benefit polluters,” “Reversing EPA’s progress in America’s most vulnerable communities,” “Dismantling the Office of Research and Development,” and “Promoting a culture of fear, forcing staff to choose between their livelihood and well-being.”
On Thursday, the 140 or so employees who allegedly had signed the letter with their official titles received emails saying they had been placed on leave for two weeks “pending an administrative investigation,” The New York Times reported.
“The Environmental Protection Agency has a zero-tolerance policy for career bureaucrats unlawfully undermining, sabotaging, and undercutting the administration’s agenda as voted for by the great people of this country last November,” Brigit Hirsch, an EPA spokesperson, said in a statement, according to Bloomberg Law News.
“The letter, addressed to EPA head Lee Zeldin, alleged the agency has used its communication platforms to ‘promote misinformation and overtly partisan rhetoric,'” Bloomberg added. “One example the signatories cited was a March statement laying out the administration’s deregulatory agenda, in which Zeldin referred to ‘the climate change religion.'”
READ MORE: Democratic Strategist Warns Trump Could Try to Impose Martial Law Before 2026 Midterms
Nicole Cantello, president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) Local 704, called the move “blatant retaliation,” The Hill reported.
“We don’t swear an oath to the Trump administration, we swear an oath to the Constitution and so we don’t feel like we violated that oath or that we did anything wrong by signing this letter,” she said.
Cantello, on social media, wrote that EPA workers “have the right to freedom of speech, just like every other American.”
Addressing EPA Administrator Zeldin directly, she said: “See you in court.”
Some denounced the administration’s move.
Attorney Mark Zaid, who handles national security and whistleblower cases, wrote: “Apparently retaliation has already begun. This is what defines this Administration.”
He also offered to “provide pro bono consultation to examine current situation.”
The New York Times’ Trip Gabriel asked, “What First Amendment?”
READ MORE: Trump Appeared Unaware His Budget Bill Cuts $1T From Medicaid: Report
Image of Lee Zeldin via Shutterstock
House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, in an apparent attempt to prevent the Republican Speaker, Mike Johnson, from passing President Donald Trump’s massive budget bill in the dead of night, has been delivering a speech on the floor for over six hours, and may break the record of 8 hours and 32 minutes set in 2021 by then GOP Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy.
Speaker Johnson reportedly allowed minimal time for debate on what Trump calls his “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” which cuts Medicaid by about $1 trillion, and forces cuts to Medicare and SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, by hundreds of billions of dollars while carving out tax breaks that largely favor the wealthy. An estimated 17 million people could lose insurance as a result of the legislation.
Once Leader Jeffries concludes his remarks—which he began around 5 AM—Johnson will put the bill to a final vote, and he’s anxious to get the legislation to the President’s desk before Trump’s arbitrary July 4 deadline.
READ MORE: Democratic Strategist Warns Trump Could Try to Impose Martial Law Before 2026 Midterms
“What is contemplated in this one big, ugly bill is wrong,” Leader Jeffries said, as NBC News reported. “It’s dangerous, and it’s cruel, and cruelty should not be either the objective or the outcome of legislation that we consider here in the United States House of Representatives.”
Jeffries also called it “cruel” to cut Medicaid.
“Republicans are trying to take a chain saw to Social Security, a chain saw to Medicare, a chain saw to Medicaid, a chain saw to the health care of the American people, a chain saw to nutritional assistance for hungry children, a chain saw to farm country and a chain saw to vulnerable Americans,” Jeffries added.
Speaker Johnson, speaking to reporters, appeared displeased.
“If Hakeem will stop talking, we’ll, we’ll get the job done for the American people,” Johnson, using the Democratic Leader’s first name, told reporters.
“It takes a lot longer to build a lie than to tell the truth,” Johnson claimed. “So he’s really spinning a long tale in there, but we’re excited. The people will see the effect of this bill—the extraordinary legislation.”
Johnson offered no evidence to support his accusation.
READ MORE: Trump Appeared Unaware His Budget Bill Cuts $1T From Medicaid: Report
“It’s going to get the economy humming again, really, at a record pace, and it will help every American,” he added.
“So the sooner we can get to it, the sooner the Democrats will stop talking, we’ll get this bill done for the people, and we’re really excited about it.”
Critics blasted Speaker Johnson.
Walter Kimbrough, a three-time HBCU president, responded by posting a meme quoting the famous historian Alexis de Tocqueville, that reads: “It is easier for the world to accept a simple lie than a complex truth.”
Watch the video below or at this link.
Speaker Johnson: “If Hakeem would stop talking, we’ll get the job done for the American people. It takes a lot longer to build a lie than to tell the truth. So he’s really spinning a long tale in there.” pic.twitter.com/ih931XJnjE
— The Bulwark (@BulwarkOnline) July 3, 2025
READ MORE: ‘Special Place in Hell’: Top Dem Slams ‘Cult’ of ‘People Who Take Food Away’ From Kids
Image via Reuters
Well-known veteran Democratic strategist James Carville is out with a second dire warning about President Donald Trump and the 2026 midterm elections.
Earlier this week, Carville, a political consultant and strategist since the 1970s and now a political commentator, warned that Trump might try to rig the 2026 elections in one way or another—including, he suggested, by possibly trying to cancel them.
On Wednesday night, he offered up another possibility: martial law.
On NewsNation (video below), Carville predicted a “Democratic blowout” in this November’s gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia, and that President Trump will be forced to see the writing on the wall.
READ MORE: Trump Appeared Unaware His Budget Bill Cuts $1T From Medicaid: Report
“I think he’s gonna read the election,” Carville said. “And I think he’s going to see this big, beautiful bill, is about 25 points underwater. It’s going to be 30 points underwater,” Carville added, referring to the Republican budget bill that guts Medicaid and Medicare, and is likely to pass the House and head to Trump’s desk for a July 4 signing.
“He’s going to see a massive defeat coming, and he’s going to try to do anything he can to extricate himself in that defeat,” Carville warned.
“And I would not put it at all past him to try to call martial law or declare that there’s some kind of national emergency in the country, or anything like that, because the hoofprints are coming, you can hear ’em, and they’re gonna get a shellacking in November of ’26.”
READ MORE: ‘Special Place in Hell’: Top Dem Slams ‘Cult’ of ‘People Who Take Food Away’ From Kids
Mediaite noted that “Bill O’Reilly and Stephen A. Smith also joined the panel discussion, with O’Reilly mocking Carville’s mention of ‘martial law,’ calling it a ‘scare tactic’ and arguing the economy will dictate the midterms.”
On Tuesday, Carville spoke about Trump with former CNN journalist Jim Acosta.
“I don’t put anything past him, nothing,” Carville warned. “To try to call the election off, to do anything he can. He can think of things like that that we can’t because we’re not accustomed to thinking like that.”
“You know people come up to me all the time and say, ‘James. I’m really scared,’” Carville told Acosta on “The Jim Acosta Show.”
“I said, ‘you should be, you have every reason to be scared. Don’t kid yourself,’” Carville added.
Watch the video below or at this link.
READ MORE: Trump Threatens to Block NYC Democratic Mayoral Nominee He Calls a ‘Communist Lunatic’
‘What First Amendment?’: 140 EPA Workers Suspended After Opposing Trump Agenda
‘Stop Talking’: Johnson Suggests Jeffries Is Lying in Marathon Budget Speech
Democratic Strategist Warns Trump Could Try to Impose Martial Law Before 2026 Midterms
Trump Appeared Unaware His Budget Bill Cuts $1T From Medicaid: Report
‘Every Reason to Be Scared’: Strategist Worried Trump Could Try to Rig or Cancel Midterms
News3 days ago‘Special Place in Hell’: Top Dem Slams ‘Cult’ of ‘People Who Take Food Away’ From Kids
News3 days agoTrump Appeared Unaware His Budget Bill Cuts $1T From Medicaid: Report
News3 days ago‘Every Reason to Be Scared’: Strategist Worried Trump Could Try to Rig or Cancel Midterms
News3 days agoTrump Threatens to Block NYC Democratic Mayoral Nominee He Calls a ‘Communist Lunatic’
News2 days agoDemocratic Strategist Warns Trump Could Try to Impose Martial Law Before 2026 Midterms
News2 days ago‘Stop Talking’: Johnson Suggests Jeffries Is Lying in Marathon Budget Speech
News2 days ago‘What First Amendment?’: 140 EPA Workers Suspended After Opposing Trump Agenda